Neesha Rani vs Neeraj Kumar
2022 Latest Caselaw 10616 P&H

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 10616 P&H
Judgement Date : 7 September, 2022

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Neesha Rani vs Neeraj Kumar on 7 September, 2022

TA-1125-2021                                                      -1-



       IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                      CHANDIGARH

                                                TA-1125-2021 (O&M)
                                                Date of decision: 07.09.2022

Neesha Rani
                                                                  ....Petitioner



                                          Vs.

Neeraj Kumar
                                                                ....Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN

Present:    Mr. Narayan Prasad Gupta, Advocate for
            Mr. G.S. Thind, Advocate
            for the petitioner.

            None for the respondent.

                    *******

ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN, J. (Oral)

Prayer in this petition is for transfer of the petition filed by the

respondent-husband under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, pending

before the Family Court, Ludhiana to the competent Court of jurisdiction at

Patiala.

While issuing notice of motion, following order was passed by

this Court on 05.01.2022: -

"Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that in

order to attend the proceedings initiated by the respondent-

husband under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

1 of 5

(HM Act) for restitution of conjugal rights bearing case

No.HMA/1536/2021 pending in the Court of Additional

Principal Judge, Family Court, Ludhiana, the petitioner-wife

would have to travel a distance of about 100 kilometres (one

way). It is further the contention that the petitioner has a minor

child and it would be difficult for her to travel to Ludhiana on

each and every date to attend the proceedings. The learned

counsel has further stated that the petitioner has no

independent source of income and has also filed a petition

under Section 13(1)(ia) of the HM Act for divorce by

dissolution of marriage which is pending at Patiala."

Learned counsel has relied upon the judgments 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

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."

Learned counsel has further relied upon N.C.V. Aishwarya Vs.

A.S. Saravana Karthik Sha, 2022 Live Law (SC) 627, wherein the

Hon'ble Supreme Court held as under: -

2 of 5

"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.

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."

Since vide order dated 05.01.2022, the trial Court was directed

to adjourn the case beyond the date fixed before this Court, it is deemed to

be service upon the respondent.

3 of 5

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

family condition of the wife, custody of the minor child, economic condition

of the wife, her physical health and earning capacity of the husband and

most important, 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.

After hearing the counsel for the petitioner, considering the fact

that the petitioner-wife will have to bear the litigation expenses and

transportation expenses and in view of the judgments in 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

deem it appropriate to allow the present petition, subject to the following

conditions:-

1. The petition filed under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, pending before the Family Court, Ludhiana will be transferred to the competent Court of jurisdiction at Patiala.

2. The District Judge, Patiala will assign the said petition to the competent Court of jurisdiction.

3. The Family Court, Ludhiana is directed to transfer all the record pertaining to the aforesaid case to District Judge, Patiala.

4. The parties are directed to appear before the Family Court, Patiala within a period of 01 month from today.

5. The Family Court, Patiala will make all the endeavour to refer

4 of 5

the case before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre for exploring the possibility of amicable settlement between the parties.