Punjab-Haryana High Court
Harminder Kaur vs Raman Kumar on 18 January, 2023
1
N THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
TA No.67-2023 (O&M)
Date of decision: 18.01.2023
Harminder Kaur
...Petitioner(s)
vs
Raman Kumar
...Respondent(s)
CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA
Present:- Ms. Neha Dewan, Advocate for the petitioner.
***
NIDHI GUPTA, J.(Oral)
CM-873-CII-2023
This is an application under Section 151 CPC for exemption
from filing certified/typed/more legible copies of the documents i.e.
Annexure P1 to P4.
After going through the contents of the application, the same
is allowed subject to just all exceptions.
MAIN CASE
1. Prayer in this petition filed by petitioner-wife is for transfer
of petition filed by respondent-husband under Section 13 of the Hindu
Marriage Act, bearing No.HMA/9796/2022 titled "Raman Kumar vs.
Harminder Kaur" pending in the Family Court, Ludhiana, to a Court of
competent jurisdiction at Patiala.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, submits that:
i) that the parties were married on 05.02.2016;
1 of 6
ii) that one son was born out of the wedlock on
24.02.2017;
iii) that the petitioner along with her minor son, who is
studying in Guru Nanak Foundation Public School,
Patiala, is living with her parents at Patiala;
iv) that distance between place of residence and place of
proceedings is about 100 kms. (one side);
v) that the petitioner has also filed an application for
registering FIR against the respondent and his family,
which is pending before the Senior Superintendent of
Police, Patiala.
vi) that the petitioner has no source of income.
3. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
4. The legal position in such like cases as the present one, is
well established. In this regard, judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court
rendered in N.C.V. Aishwarya vs A.S. Saravana Karthik Sha," 2022 Live
Law (SC) 627, is most relevant 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
2 of 6
are seeking their sustenance to life. Given the
prevailing socioe-conomic 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."
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
3 of 6
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 filed by respondent-husband under Section 13
of the Hindu Marriage Act, bearing No.HMA/9796/2022 titled
"Raman Kumar vs. Harminder Kaur" pending in the Family
Court, Ludhiana, is transferred to a court of competent
jurisdiction at Patiala.
b) The learned 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 27.02.2023.
4 of 6
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 the petitioner
for attending the Court proceedings at District Court,
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 Ludhiana in
case the respondent opts to contest this petition.
5 of 6
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 27.02.2023, 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.
Pending application(s) if any also stand(s) disposed of.
18.01.2023 (Nidhi Gupta)
Sunena Judge
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
Whether reportable: Yes/No
6 of 6
