Punjab-Haryana High Court
Sneh Lata vs Amit Sharma on 29 November, 2023
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:151767
Neutral Citation No.: 2023:PHHC:151767
TA-336-2021 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
203 TA-336-2021
Decided on: 29.11.2023
Sneh Lata
...Applicant/Petitioner
Versus
Amit Sharma
...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY VASHISTH
Present: Mr. Naval Sharma, Advocate for
Mr. Deepak Gupta, Advocate
for the Applicant/petitioner.
Mr. Paras Talwar, Advocate 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/297/2020, filed by the respondent-husband, under Section 13 of the
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, titled as "Amit Sharma Vs. Sneh Lata", presently
pending in the Court of Learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court,
Ludhiana, to any Court of competent jurisdiction at SAS Nagar, Mohali.
2. The present transfer petition has been filed, inter alia, on the
following grounds:-
i) Petitioner-wife and respondent-husband got married on
11.05.2006, at Ludhiana, according to the Hindu rites and
1 of 6
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:151767
Neutral Citation No.: 2023:PHHC:151767
ceremonies.
ii) Out of said wedlock, two daughters namely, Aditi Sharma and
Lavishka Sharam were born, who are minor and
staying/residing with the petitioner.
iii) Petitioner-wife has instituted a petition under Section 125
Cr.P.C., for seeking maintenance and an FIR No.0045 dated
04.11.2016, under Section 498-A IPC was registered against
the respondent and his family members, which are pending in
the Court of learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate,
Derabassi.
iv) Traveling from SAS Nagar, Mohali to Ludhiana, is a distance of
around 130 Km (one side), which takes around 2 hours, thus,
causing extreme hardships to the petitioner-wife as well as the
minor children.
vi) Petitioner-wife is not earning anything and dependent upon her
widow mother and due to lack of convenient transportation
options, she is compelled to rely on public transport, resulting
in significant hardships.
vii) Financial condition of the petitioner-wife is also not sound, and
she lives in a hand to mouth condition.
3. On the other hand, Mr. Paras Talwar, learned counsel for the
respondent-husband opposed the prayer made in the present application for
transfer of case from Ludhiana to SAS Nagar, Mohali.
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
2 of 6
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:151767
Neutral Citation No.: 2023:PHHC:151767
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
the aforesaid judgment says as under:
3 of 6
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:151767
Neutral Citation No.: 2023:PHHC:151767
"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.
10. Thus, applying the principles of law, laid down by Hon'ble the
4 of 6
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:151767
Neutral Citation No.: 2023:PHHC:151767
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/297/2020, titled
as "Amit Sharma Vs. Sneh Lata", pending in the Court of
Learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Ludhiana, is
transferred to a Court of competent jurisdiction within Sessions
Division SAS Nagar, Mohali.
(ii) Learned District Judge, Ludhiana, is directed to transfer
complete record pertaining to the aforesaid case to learned
District Judge, SAS Nagar, Mohali, by directing both the sides
to appear before the Court of learned District Judge, SAS
Nagar, Mohali, on a particular date to be fixed by him, for
further proceedings.
(iii) On receipt of record of the case, learned District Judge, SAS
Nagar, Mohali, will either keep the said case in his own Court
or to assign the same to a Court having competent jurisdiction
within Sessions Division SAS Nagar, Mohali, to try the same.
(iv) The concerned Court at SAS Nagar, Mohali, 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 SAS Nagar, Mohali, 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,
Ludhiana and learned District Judge, SAS Nagar, Mohali, through email(s)
5 of 6
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:151767
Neutral Citation No.: 2023:PHHC:151767
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
29.11.2023
rashmi
Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No
Whether Reportable: Yes/No
Neutral Citation No:=2023:PHHC:151767
6 of 6
