TA No. 13 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH TA No. 13 of 2011 Date of decision:30.3.2011 Sandeep Kaur ...Applicant Versus Surjit Singh ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN Present: Mr.Sandeep K. Sharma, Advocate, for the applicant. Mr.Vikram Punia, Advocate, for the respondent. -.- JITENDRA CHAUHAN, J. The applicant-wife has filed the present application for transfer of the petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short `the Act') filed by the respondent/husband from Chandigarh to the court of competent jurisdiction at Jalandhar. Learned counsel for the applicant contends that the husband/respondent earlier also filed a petition under Section 13 of the Act, which was subsequently compromised. However, a couple of months thereafter, the applicant was again thrown out from the matrimonial home. He further contends that the applicant is residing at Jalandhar with her parents alongwith her minor daughter and in the fact situation it is not convenient for her to travel from Jalandhar to Chandigarh to defend the proceedings instituted by the husband. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent submits TA No. 13 of 2011 2 that she left the matrimonial home on her own accord. The distance of 150 kms from Jalandhar to Chandigarh is not a long distance in these days. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. From the perusal of record, it emerges that the applicant has no source of income and is residing at the mercy of her old parents alongwith her minor daughter at Jalandhar. It is the divorce petition of the husband and it should be conducted in a manner which should least trouble the wife. In the circumstances, it would certainly be not convenient for the applicant to undertake frequent trips from Jalandhar to Chandigarh. It is well settled principle of law that convenience of the wife is to be seen in such like matters as has been held in cases of Sumitra Singh Vs. Kumar Sanjay and another, AIR 2002 SC 396, Neelam Kanwar vs Devinder Singh Kanwar, 2001(1) M.L.J. 509 (SC) and Mangla Patil Kale Vs.Sanjeev Kumar, (2003) 10 SCC 280. Considering the facts that the applicant is resourceless, distance between Jalandhar to Chandigarh and primarily the convenience of the wife is to be seen, therefore, in my opinion, the present application deserves to be allowed. In view of the above, the application is allowed. The petition filed by the respondent titled `Surjit Singh Vs. Sandeep Kaur' under Section 13 of the Act is withdrawn from the court of learned Additional District Judge, Chandigarh and is transferred to the court of competent jurisdiction at Jalandhar. File shall be sent by the trial Court at Chandigarh to the learned District Judge, Jalandhar, within two weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. The learned District Judge, Jalandhar will either dispose it of himself or entrust it to any other Court of competent jurisdiction. TA No. 13 of 2011 3 Parties are directed to appear before the District Judge, Jalandhar, on 28.4.2011. 30.3.2011 (JITENDRA CHAUHAN) mk JUDGE