Thursday, 21, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Aarti Walia vs Mahesh Manchanda
2023 Latest Caselaw 21086 P&H

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 21086 P&H
Judgement Date : 5 December, 2023

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Aarti Walia vs Mahesh Manchanda on 5 December, 2023

                                                      Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:155289




                                          Neutral Citation No.:2023:PHHC:155289
TA-992-2023                                            -1-


            IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                         AT CHANDIGARH

214                                                         TA-992-2023
                                                            Decided on: 05.12.2023

Aarti Walia                                            ...Applicant/Petitioner

                                          Versus
Mahesh Manchanda                                                ...Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH
Present:      Ms. Shivani, Advocate for
              Mr. Vishal Mittal, Advocate for the Applicant/petitioner.

         None for the respondent.
                               ****
SANJAY VASHISTH, J. (Oral)

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

filed by the applicant-wife, for seeking transfer of the petition bearing

No.HMA/564/2020 filed by the respondent-husband, under Section 13 of

the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, titled as "Mahesh Manchanda Vs. Aarti

Walia", presently pending in the Court of learned Principal Judge, Family

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

2. Despite service, there is no representation on behalf of the

respondent-husband.

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

following grounds:-

i) Applicant-wife and respondent-husband got married on 06.04.2019, at Patiala, according to the Hindu rites and ceremonies, however, no child is born out of the said wedlock.

ii) Applicant-wife has instituted two litigations against the respondent-husband, which are pending in the Courts at Patiala,

1 of 5

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:155289

Neutral Citation No.:2023:PHHC:155289

are as under:

(i) FIR No.109 dated 17.05.2020, under Sections 377, 406 and 498-A IPC registered against the respondent-husband and other family members ; and

(ii) A complaint under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act.

iii) Traveling from Patiala to Kurukshetra, is a distance of around 100 Kms (one side), which takes around 2 ½ hours, thus, causing extreme hardships to the petitioner-wife.

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

v) Financial condition of the parental home of the petitioner-wife is also not sound, and her parental family lives in a hand to mouth condition.

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

the material available on record.

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

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

2 of 5

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:155289

Neutral Citation No.:2023:PHHC:155289

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

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

3 of 5

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:155289

Neutral Citation No.:2023:PHHC:155289

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. 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/564/2020 titled as "Mahesh Manchanda Vs. Aarti Walia", pending in the Court of learned 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

4 of 5

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:155289

Neutral Citation No.:2023:PHHC:155289

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.

10. 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

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:155289

                                 5 of 5

 

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : MAIMS

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter