Kamaldeep Kaur vs Manish Mittal
2023 Latest Caselaw 21080 P&H

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Kamaldeep Kaur vs Manish Mittal on 5 December, 2023

                                                      Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:155297




                                         Neutral Citation No.: 2023:PHHC:155297
TA-995-2023(O&M)                                                       -1-




           IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                        AT CHANDIGARH


217                                                         TA-995-2023(O&M)
                                                           Decided on: 05.12.2023




Kamaldeep Kaur                                      ...Applicant/Petitioner




                                         Versus


Manish Mittal                                          ...Respondent


CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH


Present:     Mr. Kuldeep Singh, Advocate for
             Mr. D.V. Dhindsa, Advocate for the Applicant/petitioner.

             Mr. Anil Garg, Advocate for
             Mr. Sham Lal Saha, Advocate the respondent.

                                          ****

SANJAY VASHISTH, J. (Oral)

Power of attorney on behalf of the respondent has been filed in

the Court today. The same is taken on record. Registry is directed to tag the

same at appropriate place in the paper-book.

1. Present transfer application, under Section 24 CPC, has been

filed by the petitioner-wife, for seeking transfer of the petition, bearing No.

HMA/101/2023, filed by the respondent-husband, under Section 13 of the

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, titled as "Manish Mittal Vs. Kamaldeep Kaur",

1 of 6

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:155297

Neutral Citation No.: 2023:PHHC:155297 TA-995-2023(O&M) -2-

presently pending in the Court of Learned Additional Principal Judge,

Family Court, Kurukshetra, to any Court of competent jurisdiction at Patiala.

2. The present transfer petition has been filed, inter alia, on the

following grounds:-

i) Petitioner-wife and respondent-husband got married on 12.05.2017, at Patiala, according to the Hindu rites and ceremonies.

ii) Out of the said wedlock, a femal child was born, but unfortunately the minor child died.

iii) Petitioner-wife has instituted a complaint under Sections 12(1) (2), 17, 18, 19, 20, 22 and 23 of the Protection of the Women from Domestic Violence Act, which is pedning in the Courts at Patiala.

iv) Traveling from Patiala to Kurukshetra, is a distance of around 111 Km (one side), which takes around 3 hours, thus, causing extreme hardships to the petitioner-wife

vi) Petitioner-wife is not earning anything and financially dependent upon her mother. Due to lack of convenient transportation options, she is compelled to rely on public transport, resulting in significant hardships.

vii) Financial condition of the parental family of the petitioner is also not sound, and she lives in a hand to mouth condition.

3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent opposed

the prayer made in the present application for transfer of case from

Kurukshetra to Patiala.

4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through

the material available on record.

5. In the facts and circumstances similar to the present case, in

2 of 6

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:155297

Neutral Citation No.: 2023:PHHC:155297 TA-995-2023(O&M) -3-

paragraph Nos. 9 & 10 of the judgment rendered in the case of N.C.V.

Aishwarya v. A.S. Saravana Karthik Sha, AIR 2022 SC 4318, Hon'ble the

Apex 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."

6. Further, Hon'ble the Apex Court in Rajani Kishor Pradeshi v.

Kishor Babulal Pardeshi, (2005) 12 SCC 237, 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 ordinary be

allowed, taking into consideration their convenience and the Courts should

desist from putting female litigants under undue hardships."

7. However, to avoid any misuse of the lenient view by the female

litigants, Hon'ble the Apex Court in Anindita Das v. Srijit Das, (2006) 9

SCC 197, has also cautioned that the Courts should ensure that such leniency

3 of 6

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:155297

Neutral Citation No.: 2023:PHHC:155297 TA-995-2023(O&M) -4-

given to the female litigants should not be misused. Relevant Paragraph 3 of

the aforesaid judgment says as under:

"3. Even otherwise, it must be seen that at one stage this Court was showing leniency to ladies. But since then it has been found that a large number of transfer petitions are filed by women taking advantage of the leniency taken by this Court. On an average at least 10 to 15 transfer petitions are on Board of each Court on each admission day. It is, therefore, clear that leniency of this Court is being misused by the women."

8. Thus, this Court is of the view that while adjudicating a transfer

petition initiated by the wife in the context of a matrimonial dispute, the

Court must take into account a comprehensive array of the following

factors:-

(a) Economic condition and earning capacity of the parties, i.e. husband and wife;

(b) Social standing of the wife and her dependency on her parents;

(c) Custody of any minor children involved;

            (d)    Education of the children, if any;
            (e)    Physical well-being of both, i.e. wife and husband;
            (f)    Pending litigation(s) between the parties including
                   criminal cases, if any;
            (g)    Accessibility of the location from where the wife resides
                   to the court where the case is pending;
            (h)    Availability of convenient commuting options

Undoubtedly, only a harmonious consideration of all these vital

aspects would ensure a just and equitable decision in such cases.

9. Considering the aforementioned settled proposition of law and

facts of the present case, the submission made by learned counsel for the

4 of 6

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:155297

Neutral Citation No.: 2023:PHHC:155297 TA-995-2023(O&M) -5-

respondent is not tenable and the same is hereby rejected.

10. Thus, applying the principles of law, laid down by Hon'ble the

Apex Court in N.C.V Aishwarya's case (supra), Rajani Kishor's case

(supra) and Anindita Das's case (supra), this Court deems it appropriate to

allow the present petition, by issuing following directions:

(i) Petition filed by respondent - husband under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, bearing No. HMA/101/2023, titled as "Manish Mittal Vs. Kamaldeep Kaur", pending in the Court of Learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Kurukshetra, is transferred to a Court of competent jurisdiction within Sessions Division Patiala.

(ii) Learned District Judge, Kurukshetra, is directed to transfer complete record pertaining to the aforesaid case to learned District Judge, Patiala, by directing both the sides to appear before the Court of learned District Judge, Patiala, on a particular date to be fixed by him, for further proceedings.

(iii) On receipt of record of the case, learned District Judge, Patiala, will either keep the said case in his own Court or to assign the same to a Court having competent jurisdiction within Sessions Division Patiala, to try the same.

(iv) The concerned Court at Patiala, shall diligently strive to amicably resolve the marital discord between the parties by referring the matter to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre.

(v) After transfer at Patiala, the concerned Court will accommodate the parties to the lis with at least one date in a calendar month.

11. For compliance of the order passed by this Court Registry is

directed to transmit copies of this order forthwith to learned District Judge,

Kurukshetra and learned District Judge, Patiala, through email(s) as well.

Petitioner through her counsel, is also directed to ensure her

5 of 6

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:155297

Neutral Citation No.: 2023:PHHC:155297 TA-995-2023(O&M) -6-

appearance accordingly.

Petition stands disposed of in above terms.

Pending misc. application(s), if any, also stands disposed of.

                                                           (SANJAY VASHISTH)
                                                                 JUDGE
05.12.2023
rashmi

Whether speaking/reasoned:         Yes/No
Whether Reportable:                Yes/No

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:155297

6 of 6