Punjab-Haryana High Court
Jaswinder Kaur vs Rajdeep Singh Sodhi on 22 November, 2023
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:149129
Neutral Citation No.: 2023:PHHC:149129
TA-231-2023 (O&M) -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
206 TA-231-2023 (O&M)
Decided on: 22.11.2023
Jaswinder Kaur
...Applicant/Petitioner
Versus
Rajdeep Singh Sodhi
...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH
Present: Mr. Amandeep Singh, Advocate
for the Applicant/petitioner.
Mr. Sahej Mahajan, Advocate for the respondent.
****
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, bearing No.
HMA/56/2023, filed by the respondent-husband, under Section 9 of the
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, titled as "Rajdeep Singh Sodhi Vs. Jaswinder
Kaur", presently pending in the Court of Learned Additional Principal
Judge, Family Court, Amritsar, to any Court of competent jurisdiction at
Ludhiana.
2. The present transfer petition has been filed, inter alia, on the
following grounds:-
i) Petitioner-wife and respondent-husband got married on
16.01.2016, at Ludhiana, according to the Sikh rites and
ceremonies, however, no child is born from the said wedlock.
ii) Petitioner-wife has instituted a petition under Section 125
Cr.P.C. of the Hindu Marriage Act, in the Courts at Ludhiana
1 of 6
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:149129
Neutral Citation No.: 2023:PHHC:149129
TA-231-2023 (O&M) -2-
bearing No.MNT/125/2016. In March, 2016, respondent was
proceeded against ex parte in the said proceedings. However,
later on, the ex parte proceedings were set aside and petition
was restored back to its original number. In the recent past,
interim maintenance has been ordered to be paid to the
petitioner by the respondent, but till date, no amount has been
paid and the order of interim maintenance is applicable from the
date of filing of the application filed under Section 125 Cr.P.C.
iv) Traveling from Ludhiana to Amrtisar, is a distance of
around 140Km (one side), which takes around 2 hours, thus,
causing extreme hardships to the petitioner-wife.
v) Petitioner-wife is not earning anything and financially
dependent on her parents. Due to lack convenient transportation
options, she is compelled to rely on public transport, resulting
in significant hardships.
vi) 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. On the other hand, Mr. Sahej Mahajan, Advocate, learned counsel
for the respondent-husband vehemently argues that the petitioner-wife had
left her matrimonial home on her own without any substantial cause and
many requests had been made by the respondent-husband to the petitioner to
join the matrimonial home again and to share all the responsibilities. He
further submits that respondent is presently posted in a Bank at Gwalior.
Counsel submits that the hearings are attended by his old aged father,and in
case, the petition is transferred to the Courts at Ludhiana, it would be
difficult for the old aged father to attend the proceedings on behalf of the
respondent. Therefore, he opposed the prayer made in the present
2 of 6
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:149129
Neutral Citation No.: 2023:PHHC:149129
TA-231-2023 (O&M) -3-
application for transfer of case from Amritsar to Ludhiana.
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.
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
3 of 6
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:149129
Neutral Citation No.: 2023:PHHC:149129
TA-231-2023 (O&M) -4-
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
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
4 of 6
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:149129
Neutral Citation No.: 2023:PHHC:149129
TA-231-2023 (O&M) -5-
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.
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 9 of the
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, bearing No. HMA/56/2023, titled as
"Rajdeep Singh Sodhi Vs. Jaswinder Kaur", pending in the
Court of Learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court,
Amritsar, is transferred to a Court of competent jurisdiction
within Sessions Division Ludhiana.
(ii) Learned District Judge, Amritsar, is directed to transfer
complete record pertaining to the aforesaid case to learned
District Judge, Ludhiana, by directing both the sides to appear
before the Court of learned District Judge, Ludhiana, on a
particular date to be fixed by him, for further proceedings.
(iii) On receipt of record of the case, learned District Judge,
Ludhiana, will either keep the said case in his own Court or to
assign the same to a Court having competent jurisdiction within
Sessions Division Ludhiana, to try the same.
(iv) The concerned Court at Ludhiana, 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 Ludhiana, the concerned Court will
accommodate the parties to the lis with at least one date in a
5 of 6
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:149129
Neutral Citation No.: 2023:PHHC:149129
TA-231-2023 (O&M) -6-
calendar month.
11. The present transfer application/petition is disposed. In order to
ensure appearance of the parties before learned District Judge, Ludhiana as
per the direction of learned District Judge, Amritsar, 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
22.11.2023
rashmi
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
Whether Reportable: Yes/No
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:149129
6 of 6
