TA No.410 of 2011(O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH TA No.410 of 2011 (O&M) ` Date of decision 07.09.2011 Monika ...Applicant Versus Tarsem Lal ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN Present: Mr.Arvind Kashyap, Advocate for the applicant. Respondent ex parte. JITENDRA CHAUHAN, J. (Oral) 1. As per the office report, the respondent has been served through his father, however none has caused appearance on his behalf. Accordingly, the respondent is proceeded against ex parte. 2. The present application has been preferred by the applicant-wife, under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, praying for the transfer of the petition titled as ‘Tarsem Lal Vs. Smt. Monika’, filed by the respondent under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short `the Act'), from the Court of learned Additional District Judge, Ambala, to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Fatehgarh Sahib. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant contends that the 1 TA No.410 of 2011(O&M) applicant has filed a petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. which is pending adjudication before the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Amloh, District Fatehgard Sahib, in which the respondent is already appearing. 4. I have heard the learned counsel for the applicant and perused the record. 5. Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Neelam Kanwar vs Devinder Singh Kanwar, 2001(1) M.L.J. 509 (SC), has observed as under:- “We are mindful of the fact that the petitioner is a lady and first respondent is a male, and, therefore, for convenience of wife, a transfer to the place where the lady is residing, would be preferred by this Court unless, it is shown that there are special reason not to do so. No special reason is shown.” 6. Smt. Monika, the applicant-wife, is presently residing at Fatehgarh Sahib with her parents. The respondent-husband filed a petition under Section 13 of the Act, which is pending before learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, Ambala. It would certainly be difficult for the wife, living at the mercy of her parents and having no source of income, to attend the court proceedings at Ambala, which is at a distance of more than 80 kms. from the place of her residence. 7. Considering the fact that the applicant is a resident of Fatehgarh Sahib, and primarily, the convenience of the wife is to be 2 TA No.410 of 2011(O&M) seen, therefore, in my opinion, the balance of convenience is in favour of the applicant-wife and against the respondent. 8. In view of the above, the instant transfer application is allowed and the petition under Section 13 of the Act titled as ‘Tarsem Lal Vs. Smt. Monika’ is withdrawn from the Court of learned Additional District Judge, Ambala, and is transferred to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Fatehgarh Sahib. The entire record pertaining to the petition under Section 13 of the Act shall be sent by the trial Court at Ambala, to the learned District Judge, Fatehgarh Sahib, within three weeks, who will either himself dispose it of or entrust it to any other Court of competent jurisdiction at Fatehgarh Sahib. 9. The parties shall appear before the Court of competent jurisdiction at Fatehgarh Sahib, on 22.10.2011. 07.09.2011 (JITENDRA CHAUHAN) atulsethi JUDGE Note : Whether to be referred to Reporter ? Yes / No 3