TA No.353 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH TA No.353 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision : 28.07.2011 Harmanpreet Kaur ...Applicant Versus Deepak Singh Bedi ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN Present: Mr. Vivek Thakur, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. Sumeet Puri, Advocate, for the respondent. JITENDRA CHAUHAN, J. (Oral) 1. 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 ‘Deepak Singh Bedi Vs. Harmanpreet Kaur’, filed by the respondent under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, (for short `the Act') from the Court of Additional Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.) at Amritsar, to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Kapurthala. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant contends that on the complaint made by the applicant, FIR No.48 dated 19.3.2011, under Sections 498-A/406 IPC, stands registered against the respondent at TA No.353 of 2011 2 Kapurthala and the respondent is already appearing therein. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant further contends that the applicant is a resident of Kapurthala, and the purpose of filing the petition under Section 9 of the Act is only to harass the applicant. 4. The learned counsel for the respondent has vehemently opposed the prayer. 5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 6. 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.” 7. Mrs. Harmanpreet Kaur, the applicant-wife, is residing at Kapurthala. The respondent-husband filed a petition under Section 9 of the Act, which is pending before the Court of Additional Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.) at Amritsar. 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 Amritsar, which is at a distance of about 70 kms. from the place of her residence. Moreover, the respondent is already appearing in the criminal proceedings initiated against him at TA No.353 of 2011 3 Kapurthala. 8. Considering the fact that the applicant is a resident of Kapurthala, and primarily, the convenience of the wife is to be seen, therefore, in my opinion, the balance of convenience is in favour of the applicant-wife and against the respondent. 9. In view of the above, the instant transfer application is allowed and the petition under Section 9 of the Act titled as ‘Deepak Singh Bedi Vs. Harmanpreet Kaur’ is withdrawn from the Court of Additional Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.) at Amritsar, and is transferred to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Kapurthala. The entire record pertaining to the petition under Section 9 of the Act shall be sent by the trial Court at Amritsar, to the learned District Judge, Kapurthala, within three weeks, who will either himself dispose it of or entrust it to any other Court of competent jurisdiction at Kapurthala. 10. The parties shall appear before the learned District Judge, Kapurthala, on 27.08.2011. 28.07.2011 (JITENDRA CHAUHAN) atulsethi JUDGE Note : Whether to be referred to Reporter ? Yes / No