Sonail Trehan vs Nitin Kapoor
2022 Latest Caselaw 13930 P&H

     T.A.No. 1351 of 2022                              1                                         109



                           IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                                          CHANDIGARH

                                                                            TA No. 1351 of 2022

                                                           Date of decision: November 07 , 2022


                   Sonali Trehan

                                                                   ..........Petitioner

                                             v

                   Nitin Kapoor


                                                       ...........Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA

Present:- None.

Nidhi Gupta, J.(Oral)

1. The Lawyers are abstaining from work.

2. Prayer in this petition filed by petitioner wife is for transfer of

the petition filed by respondent-husband under Section 9 of the Hindu

Marriage Act,1955 titled "Nitin Kapoor v Sonali Trehan" pending in the

Court of Ld. Addl. Distt. & Sessions Judge, Fatehgarh Sahib for 2.12.2022

to a Court of competent jurisdiction at Jalandhar.

3. It is stated by the petitioner in the petition:

i) that the parties were married on 13.12.2021 at Jalandhar

according to Hindu rites and ceremonies.

ii) that the petitioner and respondent lived and cohabited

together as husband and wife and she is having 9 months'

pregnancy.

RAJINDER PARSHAD JOSHI 2022.11.09 10:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

iii) that with a motive to harass the petitioner and his

family the respondent has filed aforesaid petition at

Fatehgarh Sahib with false allegations.

iv) the petitioner is living with her parents at Jalandar

which is 143 kms. away from Fatehgarh Sahib.

v) there is no one in the family to accompany her to

Fatehgarh Sahib to attend the proceedings initiated by

respondent-husband at Fatehgarh Sahib.

vi) respondent is already attending proceedings under

Section 125 Cr.PC initiated by the petitioner at Jalandhar

as respondent is not paying even a single penny to her to

maintain herself and to take care of her day to day medical

needs.

vii) respondent and his family members are very

influential having local clouts and thus petitioner will not

be able to defend her interest in litigation at Fatehgarh

Sahib.

4. It is inter alia on these grounds that petitioner prays for transfer

of the case, as detailed in para 2 above, from Fatehgarh Sahib to Jalandhar.

5. The legal position in such like cases as the present one, is well

established. In this regard, judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court

rendered in N.C.V. Aishwarya vs A.S. Saravana Karthik Sha," 2022

Live Law (SC) 627, is most relevant wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court

has held as under:-

RAJINDER PARSHAD JOSHI 2022.11.09 10:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

"9. The cardinal principle for exercise of power under section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure is that the ends of justice should demand the transfer of the suit, appeal or other proceeding. In matrimonial matters, wherever Courts are called upon to consider the plea of transfer, the Courts have to take into consideration the economic soundness of both the parties, the social strata of the spouses and their behavioural pattern, their standard of life prior to the marriage and subsequent thereto and the circumstances of both the parties in eking out their livelihood and under whose protective umbrella they are seeking their sustenance to life. Given the prevailing socioeconomic paradigm in the Indian society, generally, it is the wife's convenience which must be looked at while considering transfer.

10. Further, when two or more proceedings are pending in different Courts between the same parties which raise common question of fact and law, and when the decisions in the cases are interdependent, it is desirable that they should be tried together by the same Judge so as to avoid multiplicity in trial of the same issues and conflict of decisions."

6. Further reliance can be placed upon the judgments in "Sumita

Singh vs Kumar Sanjay", 2002 SC 396 and "Rajani Kishor Pardeshi

vs Kishor Babulal Pardeshi", 2005(12) SCC 237, wherein the Hon'ble

Supreme Court has observed that "while deciding the transfer application,

the Courts are required to give more weightage and consideration to the

convenience of the female litigants and transfer of legal proceedings from

one Court to another should ordinarily be allowed, taking into

consideration their convenience and the Courts should desist from putting

female litigants under undue hardships."

7. Even this Court in number of cases has followed the aforesaid

principle of law. Accordingly, it is well settled that while considering the

transfer of a matrimonial dispute/case, at the instance of the wife, the Court

is to consider the family condition of the wife, the custody of the minor

child, economic condition of the wife, her physical health and earning

capacity of the husband and most important the convenience of the wife

i.e. she cannot travel alone without assistance of a male member of her

family, connectivity of the place to and fro from her place of residence as

well as bearing of the litigation charges and travelling expenses. RAJINDER PARSHAD JOSHI 2022.11.09 10:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

8. After going through the entire paperbook, considering the fact

that issuance of notice to the respondent has the consequences of staying

further proceedings before the trial Court, otherwise the petitioner-wife

will have to bear the litigation expenses and transportation expenses and

in case, notice of motion is issued, even the respondent-husband has to

bear the litigation expenses and in view of the judgments i.e. Sumita

Singh's case (supra), Rajani Kishor Pardeshi's case (supra) and N.C.V.

Aishwarya's case (supra) passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, this

Court deems it appropriate to allow the present petition, subject to the

following conditions:-

a) The petition filed by respondent husband under Section

9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, pending in the Court of Ld.

Addl. Sessions Judge, Fatehgarh Sahib which is pending

for 2.12.2022, is transferred to a Court of competent

jurisdiction at Jalandhar.

b) The ld. District Judge, Fatehgarh Sahib is directed to

transfer complete record pertaining to the aforesaid case

to District Judge, Jalandhar.

c) The parties are directed to appear before the District &

Sessions Judge, Jalandhar on 2.12.2022.

d) The District Judge, Jalandhar, will assign the said

petition to the Court of competent jurisdiction.

9. The concerned Court at Jalandhar will make all endeavour to

refer the case before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre for exploring

the possibility of some amicable settlement between the parties. RAJINDER PARSHAD JOSHI 2022.11.09 10:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

10. . The Court concerned, where the litigation pending between

the parties, will accommodate them with one date in one calendar month.

11. However, liberty is granted to the respondent to revive this

petition, if he intends to contest the same, provided that:-

(a) The respondent will clear all arrears of maintenance

amount, if any, in terms of any petition filed by the

petitioner either under Section 125 Cr.P.C. or Section 12

of the Domestic Violence Act or Section 24 of the Hindu

Marriage Act.

(b) The respondent will file an affidavit giving

undertaking to pay Rs.1,000/- per day, to the petitioner for

attending the Court proceedings at District Courts,

Fatehgarh Sahib, on each and every date of hearing.

(c) The respondent will bring a demand draft of

Rs.25,000/-, drawn in favour of petitioner, towards the

litigation expenses to pursue the case at District Fatehgarh

Sahib in case the respondent opts to contest this petition.

12. I am supported in the above by decisions rendered by a Co-

ordinate Bench of this Court in TA No. 1315/2022, Rohini Arora v Nitin

Talwar; TA No. 1322 of 2022, Jaswinder Kaur v Gurvinderjeet Singh;

and TA No. 1323 of 2022, Usha Rani v Karmajit Singh.

13. As already noticed above, today neither the counsel for the

petitioner nor the petitioner has come present. Accordingly, in these

peculiar circumstances, in order to ensure appearance of the parties before

the District Judge, Jalandhar on 2.12.2022, it is directed that a copy of this RAJINDER PARSHAD JOSHI 2022.11.09 10:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

order be sent to the parties through registered post, besides sending a copy

of this order to the District Judges concerned through e-mail.

Disposed of.

                   7th November,2022                           (Nidhi Gupta)
                   Joshi                                         Judge




RAJINDER PARSHAD JOSHI
2022.11.09 10:18
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document