Punjab-Haryana High Court
Pooja Songar vs Amit Kumar on 17 April, 2023
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:052430
T.A.No.449 of 2023 (O&M) 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
2023:PHHC:052430
106 TA No.449 of 2023 (O&M)
Date of decision: 17.04.2023
Pooja Songar ...Petitioner
Vs
Amit Kumar ...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA
Present:- Mr. Karan Monga, Advocate for
Mr. Vishal Mittal, Advocate for the petitioner.
***
NIDHI GUPTA, J.(Oral)
1. Prayer in this petition filed by petitioner is for transfer of
petition bearing No.HMA/3166/2021 filed by respondent-husband under
Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, titled 'Amit Kumar vs. Pooja
Songar' pending in the Court of the Principal Judge, Family Court,
Ludhiana to a court of competent jurisdiction at Patiala.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, submits:
i) that the parties solemnized marriage on 14.05.2021.
ii) that one son was born out of the wedlock on
03.11.2022.
iii) that the petitioner along with minor son is living with
her parents at Patiala.
iv) that the distance between the place of residence and
place of proceedings is 94 kms (one side).
v) that the petitioner has no source of income.
vi) that the petitioner is suffering from primary infection
of Tuberculosis.
3. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
4. Besides the facts as noticed hereinabove, the legal position in
such like cases as the present one is also very clear. Reference in this
1 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:052430
regard may be made in particular, to judgment rendered by the Hon'ble
Supreme Court, in case of N.C.V. Aishwarya vs A.S. Saravana
Karthik Sha," 2022 Live Law (SC) 627, 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
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."
2 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:052430
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.HMA/3166/2021 filed by
respondent-husband under Section 9 of the Hindu
Marriage Act, 1955, titled 'Amit Kumar vs. Pooja
Songar' pending in the Court of the Principal Judge,
Family Court, Ludhiana is transferred to a court of
competent jurisdiction at Patiala.
3 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:052430
b) The ld. District Judge, Ludhiana is directed to transfer
complete record pertaining to the aforesaid case to
District Judge, Patiala.
c) The parties are directed to appear before the District
& Sessions Judge, Patiala on 24.05.2023.
d) The District Judge, Patiala will assign the said
petition to the Court of competent jurisdiction.
8. The concerned Court at Patiala 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.
(b) The respondent will file an affidavit giving
undertaking to pay Rs.1,000/- per day, to petitioner for
attending the Court proceedings at Ludhiana 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 Courts,
4 of 5
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:052430
Ludhiana, 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, Patiala on 24.05.2023, 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.
17.04.2023 (Nidhi Gupta)
ashok Judge
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
Whether reportable: Yes/No
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:052430
5 of 5
