Komal vs Govind Kumar
2023 Latest Caselaw 21726 P&H

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Komal vs Govind Kumar on 13 December, 2023

                                                      Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:160019




                                         Neutral Citation No.: 2023:PHHC:160019
TA-1069-2023                                                   -1-



           IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
                        AT CHANDIGARH
211                                              TA-1069-2023
                                         Decided on: 13.12.2023


Komal
                                                           ...Applicant/Petitioner

                                         Versus


Govind Kumar
                                                                      ...Respondent


CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH

Present:      Mr. Abhimanyu Singh, Advocate
             for the Applicant/petitioner.

             Mr. S.S. Khurana, Advocate for
             Mr. Devender Singh, 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.

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

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

DMC/253/2023, filed by the respondent-husband, under Section 13(1) (i)

and (ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, titled as "Govind Kumar Vs.

Komal", presently pending in the Court of Learned Principal Judge, Family

Court, Rohtak, to any Court of competent jurisdiction at Bhiwani.

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

1 of 6

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:160019

Neutral Citation No.: 2023:PHHC:160019

following grounds:-

i) Petitioner-wife and respondent-husband got married on 15.03.2021, at Bhiwani, according to the Hindu rites and ceremonies, however, no child is born out of the said wedlock.

ii) Petitioner-wife is working at PGIMS Rohtak, whereas respondent-husband is serving in Haryana Police as Constable.

iii) Petitioner-wife has instituted following litigations against respondent-husband, which are pending in the Courts at Bhiwani:-

a) FIR No. 98 dated 14.02.2022, under Sections 323, 34, 377, 406, 498-A and 506 IPC, registered at Police Station City Bhiwani, District Bhiwani (Annexure P-2);

b) A complaint bearing No. COMA-188 of 2022, under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (Annexure P-3); and

c) Civil Suit bearing No. CS/1716/2021.

Respondent-husband is contesting the said litigations in the Courts at Bhiwani.

iv) Traveling from Bhiwani to Rohtak, is a distance of around 60 Kms (one side), which takes around 1 ½ hours, thus, causing extreme hardships to the petitioner-wife.

3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent-husband

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

Rohtak to Bhiwani.

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

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

2 of 6

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:160019

Neutral Citation No.: 2023:PHHC:160019

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

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

3 of 6

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:160019

Neutral Citation No.: 2023:PHHC:160019

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

respondent is not tenable and the same is hereby rejected.

4 of 6

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:160019

Neutral Citation No.: 2023:PHHC:160019

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 (1) (i) and(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, bearing No. DMC/253/2023, titled as "Govind Kumar Vs. Komal", pending in the Court of Learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Rohtak, is transferred to a Court of competent jurisdiction within Sessions Division Bhiwani.

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

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

(iv) The concerned Court at Bhiwani, 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 Bhiwani, 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,

Rohtak and learned District Judge, Bhiwani, through email(s) as well.

Petitioner through her counsel, is also directed to ensure her

5 of 6

Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:160019

Neutral Citation No.: 2023:PHHC:160019

appearance accordingly.

Petition stands disposed of in above terms.

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

                                                           (SANJAY VASHISTH)
                                                                 JUDGE
13.12.2023
rashmi

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




                                                      Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:160019

                                6 of 6