TA No.171 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH TA No.171 of 2011 Date of decision : 11.05.2011 Mamta ...Applicant Versus Ashok Chawla ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN Present: Mr. Namit Gautam, Advocate for the applicant. Respondent ex parte. JITENDRA CHAUHAN, J. (Oral) 1. The applicant-wife has filed the instant application under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, seeking transfer of the petition titled as ‘Ashok Chawla Vs. Mamta’, filed by the respondent under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short `the Act'), from the Court of learned Additional Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.), Karnal, to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Ludhiana. 2. The learned counsel for the applicant has produced the order dated 30.01.2011 passed by the learned JMIC, Ludhiana, wherein the respondent has been proceeded against ex parte in the proceedings under Section 125 Cr.P.C. As per the office report, the respondent is not residing at the given address. In the circumstances, it appears that TA No.171 of 2011 2 he is deliberately avoiding service. Accordingly, the respondent is proceeded against ex parte. 3. The learned counsel for the applicant contends that the petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. filed by the applicant is prior in time. The distance between Karnal and Ludhiana is approximately 180 kms. The applicant, after having been ousted by the respondent from her matrimonial home, is residing at the mercy of her parents. She has no source to defend the petition instituted by the respondent under Section 9 of the Act. No maintenance allowance is being paid by the respondent-husband to the applicant-wife. She has one minor daughter to maintain. 4. I have heard the learned counsel for the applicant and perused the record. 5. The present petition under Section 9 of the Act has been filed by the respondent. The respondent is neither appearing in the petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. nor has he bothered to come present to defend the instant application before this Court. 6. As the applicant is residing at Ludhiana, the petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. is prior in time and the petition under Section 9 of the Act has been instituted by the respondent, therefore, the convenience of the wife is to be seen. In my opinion, the balance of convenience in the present case is in favour of the applicant-wife and against the respondent. 7. In view of the above, the instant transfer application is allowed and the petition under Section 9 of the Act titled as ‘Ashok TA No.171 of 2011 3 Chawla Vs. Mamta’ is withdrawn from the Court of learned Additional Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.), Karnal, and is transferred to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Ludhiana. The entire record pertaining to the petition under Section 9 of the Act shall be sent by the trial Court at Karnal to the learned District Judge, Ludhiana, within three weeks, who will either himself dispose it of or entrust it to any other Court of competent jurisdiction at Ludhiana. 8. The parties shall appear before the learned District Judge, Ludhiana, on 10.06.2011. 11.05.2011 (JITENDRA CHAUHAN) atulsethi JUDGE Note : Whether to be referred to Reporter ? Yes / No