Punjab-Haryana High Court
Reena Kumari vs Ashok on 15 November, 2023
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:144710
Neutral Citation No.: 2023:PHHC:144710
TA-1411-2023 (O&M) -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
109 TA-1411-2023 (O&M)
Decided on: 15.11.2023
Reena Kumari
...Applicant/Petitioner
Versus
Ashok
...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH
Present: Mr. Ashok K. Sharma (Bhana), Advocate
for the Applicant/petitioner.
****
SANJAY VASHISTH, J. (Oral)
1. Present transfer application, under Section 24 CPC, has been
filed by the petitioner-wife, for seeking transfer of the petition, filed by the
respondent-husband, bearing No. DMC/638/2023 under Section 9 of the
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, titled as "Ashok Vs. Reena Kumari", presently
pending in the Court of Learned Principal District Judge, Family Court,
Bhiwani, to any Court of competent jurisdiction at Jind.
2. The present transfer petition has been filed, inter alia, on the
following grounds:-
i) Petitioner-wife and respondent-husband got married on
20.01.2022, at Village Lajwana Kalan, Tehsil Julana, District
Jind, according to the Hindu rites and ceremonies.
ii) Out of the said wedlock, a child was born on 04.10.2022, but
the child had expired on 09.10.2022.
iii) Petitioner-wife is not earning anything, while the respondent-
husband is running a Tobacco Shop.
iv) Traveling from Jind to Bhiwani, is a distance of around 110
1 of 6
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:144710
Neutral Citation No.: 2023:PHHC:144710
TA-1411-2023 (O&M) -2-
Kms (one side), which takes around 3 hours, thus, causing
extreme hardships to the petitioner-wife.
v) Petitioner-wife has filed a complaint against the respondent-
husband, bearing FIR No.0178, under Sections 34, 352, 406,
498-A and 506 IPC, registered at Police Station Women Jind.
vi) Petitioner-wife is financially dependent on her father, and lacks
convenient transportation options, thus, is compelled to rely on
public transit, resulting in significant hardships.
vii) 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.
3. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and gone through
the material available on record.
4. 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
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
2 of 6
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:144710
Neutral Citation No.: 2023:PHHC:144710
TA-1411-2023 (O&M) -3-
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, 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."
6. 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."
7. 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;
3 of 6
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:144710
Neutral Citation No.: 2023:PHHC:144710
TA-1411-2023 (O&M) -4-
(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;
(h) Accessibility of the location from where the wife resides
to the court where the case is pending;
(i) 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.
8. This Court is of the opinion that, for the purpose of deciding the
transfer petition, it is not necessary to issue notice to the respondent-
husband. Otherwise, both the parties would be burdened with litigation
costs and transportation expenses, which shall be taxing for both the sides.
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 9 of the
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, bearing No.DMC/638/2023 , titled
as "Ashok Vs. Reena Kumari", pending in the Court of Learned
Principal District Judge, Family Court, Bhiwani, is transferred
to a Court of competent jurisdiction within Sessions Division
Jind.
(ii) Learned District Judge, Bhiwani, is directed to transfer
complete record pertaining to the aforesaid case to learned
District Judge, Jind, by directing both the sides to appear before
4 of 6
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:144710
Neutral Citation No.: 2023:PHHC:144710
TA-1411-2023 (O&M) -5-
the Court of learned District Judge, Jind, on a particular date to
be fixed by him, for further proceedings.
(iii) On receipt of record of the case, learned District Judge, Jind,
will either keep the said case in his own Court or to assign the
same to a Court having competent jurisdiction within Sessions
Division Jind, to try the same.
(iv) The concerned Court at Jind, 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 Jind, the concerned Court will accommodate
the parties to the lis with at least one date in a calendar month.
10. However, liberty is granted to the respondent-husband to get the
present transfer application/petition revived, if so advised, to contest the
same, subject to the conditions that:
(i) Petitioner-wife has concealed any material fact or aspect
while filing the present transfer application/petition, with
an intention to mislead this Court for seeking transfer of
the case.
OR
(ii) Respondent-husband is suffering from any substantial
physical/mental disability or ailment.
OR
(iii) Respondent-husband will clear all arrears of maintenance
amount, if any, in terms of a petition filed by the
petitioner-wife either under Section 125 Cr.P.C. or
Section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act or Section 24 of
the Hindu Marriage Act, or under any other law.
AND
(iv) Respondent-husband will file an affidavit, giving an
undertaking to pay Rs.1,000/- per day, to the petitioner-
wife for attending the Court proceedings at Bhiwani, on
5 of 6
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:144710
Neutral Citation No.: 2023:PHHC:144710
TA-1411-2023 (O&M) -6-
each and every date of hearing of the case.
AND
(v) Alongwith the application for revival of the present
transfer application/petition, respondent-husband will
furnish a demand draft of Rs.25,000/- in favour of
petitioner-wife, towards the litigation expenses, i.e. to
pursue the case at Bhiwani.
11. Since the present transfer application/petition is being disposed
of without issuing notice to the respondent, in order to ensure appearance of
the parties before learned District Judge, Jind, as per the direction of learned
District Judge, Bhiwani, it is also directed that a copy of this order be sent to
the respondent through registered post, besides sending copies of this order
to learned District Judges concerned, through email 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
15.11.2023
rashmi
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
Whether Reportable: Yes/No
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:144710
6 of 6
