Punjab-Haryana High Court
Mona vs Jaswinder on 22 September, 2022
TA-871-2021 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
TA-871-2021 (O&M)
Date of decision: 22.09.2022
Mona
....Petitioner
Vs.
Jaswinder
....Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN
Present: Mr. Kapil Aggarwal, 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, Jind to the competent Court of jurisdiction at
Ambala.
While issuing notice of motion, following order was passed by
this Court on 20.09.2021: -
"This petition has been filed by the wife seeking the transfer of
the petition filed under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act,
1955, bearing case No.HMA/417/2021, titled as "Jaswinder
vs. Mona", pending in the Court of Principal Judge, Family
1 of 5
Court, Jind, to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Ambala.
The petitioner claims that she got married to the
respondent on 24.02.2014 and they have been blessed with two
children. She claims that presently, she is residing with her
parents at Ambala and the distance between Jind and Ambala
is more than 175 Kms. The petitioner further claims that she
cannot properly defend the petition at Jind.
The learned counsel representing the petitioner places
reliance on the pendency of the petition filed under Section 125
Cr.P.C, at Ambala. The learned counsel contends that it will be
very difficult for the petitioner to travel on each date of
hearing."
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
2 of 5
Hon'ble Supreme Court held as under: -
"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."
As per office report, the respondent is served, however, there is
no representation on his behalf.
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, Jind will be transferred to
the competent Court of jurisdiction at Ambala.
2. The District Judge, Ambala will assign the said petition to the
competent Court of jurisdiction.
3. The Family Court, Jind is directed to transfer all the record
pertaining to the aforesaid case to District Judge, Ambala.
4. The parties are directed to appear before the Family Court,
Ambala within a period of 01 month from today.
5. The Family Court, Ambala will make all the endeavour to refer
the case before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre for
4 of 5
exploring the possibility of amicable settlement between the
parties.
6. The Court concerned, where the litigations between the parties
are pending, will accommodate them with one date in one
calender month.
Present petition is disposed of accordingly.
[ ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN ]
JUDGE
22.09.2022
vishnu
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable: Yes/No
5 of 5
