Punjab-Haryana High Court
Archana Kumari vs Amrinder Partap Singh on 17 November, 2022
T.A.No.1403 of 2022(O&M) 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
105 TA No.1403 of 2022 (O&M)
Date of decision:17.11.2022
Archana Kumari ...Petitioner(s)
vs
Amrinder Partap Singh ...Respondent(s)
CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA
Present:- Mr. Munish K. Garg, Advocate for the petitioner.
***
NIDHI GUPTA, J.(Oral)
CM No.15803-CII of 2022
Allowed as prayed for. Annexures P1 to P4 are taken on
record, subject to all just exceptions.
Main Case
1. Prayer in this petition filed by petitioner wife is for transfer of
the petition bearing No.DMC-329-2022 filed by respondent-husband
under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 titled "Amrinder
Partap Singh vs. Archana Kumari" pending in the Court of Principal
Judge, Family Court, Rewari to a court of competent jurisdiction at
Chandigarh.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, submits that:
i) that the parties were married on 18.04.2017 according
to Hindu rites and rituals.
ii) that one male child was born out of this wedlock.
iii) that the petitioner is living along with her minor son
in Chandigarh as she is working in Central Bank of India
and presently posted at Chandigarh.
iv) that the distance between place of residence and place
of proceedings is 331 kms. (one side).
1 of 5
v) that the minor son is studying in Divya Public School,
Chandigarh as evident from Annexure P3.
3. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
4. 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:-
"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."
5. Further reliance can be placed upon the judgments in "Sumita
Singh vs Kumar Sanjay", 2002 SC 396 and "Rajani Kishor
Pardeshivs 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
2 of 5
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."
6. 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.
7. 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 bearing No.DMC-329-2022 filed by
respondent-husband under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage
3 of 5
Act, 1955 titled "Amrinder Partap Singh vs. Archana Kumari"
pending in the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Rewari
is transferred to a court of competent jurisdiction at
Chandigarh.
b) The ld. District Judge, Rewari is directed to transfer
complete record pertaining to the aforesaid case to
District Judge, Chandigarh.
c) The parties are directed to appear before the District
& Sessions Judge, Chandigarh on 16.12.2022
d) The District Judge, Chandigarh will assign the said
petition to the Court of competent jurisdiction.
8. The concerned Court at Chandigarh 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.
9. The Court concerned, where the litigation pending between
the parties, will accommodate them with one date in one calendar month.
10. 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.
4 of 5
(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,
Rewari 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 Rewari
in case the respondent opts to contest this petition.
11. 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.
12. As already noticed above, since the petition is being disposed
of without issuing notice to the respondent, accordingly, in these peculiar
circumstances, in order to ensure appearance of the parties before the
District Judge, Chandigarh on 16.12.2022, it is directed that a copy of
this order be sent to the respondent(s) through registered post, besides
sending a copy of this order to the District Judges concerned through e-
mail. Petitioner through her counsel, present in the Court, is directed to
ensure her appearance accordingly.
Disposed of.
17.11.2022 (Nidhi Gupta)
ashok Judge
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
Whether reportable: Yes/No
5 of 5
