Punjab-Haryana High Court
Renu Bala vs Nikhil Sehgal on 12 September, 2022
TA No.567 of 2022 (O&M)
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
TA No.567 of 2022 (O&M)
Date of decision: 12.09.2022
Renu Bala
....Petitioner
Versus
Nikhil Sehgal
....Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN
Present: Mr. Pradeep Virk, Advocate
with Dr. Neha Awasthi, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. , Advocate
for the respondent.
ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN J. (Oral)
Prayer in this petition is for transfer of the petition filed
under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, pending in the Family
Court, Jalandhar to the competent Court of jurisdiction at S.A.S. Nagar,
Mohali.
Counsel for the petitioner has argued that on account of a
matrimonial discord, the petitioner has filed a petition under Section
125 Cr.P.C. at S.A.S. Nagar, Mohali.
Counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that the
respondent/husband has filed the petition under Section 13 of the Hindu
Marriage Act, as a counter-blast, before the Principal Judge, Family
Court, Jalandhar.
Counsel for the petitioner has also argued that on account
of a petition filed by the respondent/husband, the petitioner is facing
great difficulty in prosecuting the said case as there is a distance of
1 of 4
TA No.567 of 2022 (O&M)
about 140 Kms from S.A.S. Nagar, Mohali to Jalandhar.
Counsel for the petitioner 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 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."
Counsel for the petitioner has also relied upon the
judgment "N.C.V. Aishwarya vs A.S. Saravana Karthik Sha," 2022
Live Law (SC) 627, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed
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
2 of 4
TA No.567 of 2022 (O&M)
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."
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.
Counsel for the respondent has, however, not disputed the
factual position but opposed the submissions made by counsel for the
petitioner.
After hearing the counsel for the petitioner/parties,
considering the fact that the petitioner/wife will have to bear the
litigation expenses and transportation 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 deem it appropriate to allow the
present petition, subject to the following conditions:-
1. The petition filed under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage
Act, pending before the Family Court, Jalandhar will be
transferred to the competent Court of jurisdiction at S.A.S.
Nagar, Mohali.
2. The District Judge, S.A.S. Nagar, Mohali, will assign the
said petition to the competent Court of jurisdiction.
3. The Family Court, Jalandhar is directed to transfer all the
3 of 4
TA No.567 of 2022 (O&M)
record pertaining to the aforesaid case to District Judge,
S.A.S. Nagar, Mohali.
4. The parties are directed to appear before the trial Court,
S.A.S. Nagar, Mohali, within a period of 01 month from
today.
5. The Family Court, S.A.S. Nagar, Mohali 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.
6. The Court concerned, where the litigation pending
between the parties, will accommodate them with one date
in one calendar month.
Disposed of.
(ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN)
JUDGE
12.09.2022
yakub Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
Whether reportable: Yes/No
4 of 4
