TA No.404 of 2011(O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH TA No.404 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision :07.09.2011 Savita ...Applicant Versus Pawan ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN Present: Mr. D.S. Adlakha, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. Namit Sharma, 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 ‘Pawan Vs. Savita’, 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, Karnal, to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Yamunanagar. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has filed a petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. which is pending adjudication before the Court of learned JMIC, Jagadhri. On 1 TA No.404 of 2011(O&M) the complaint made by the applicant, FIR under section 498-A, 406, 506, 120-B IPC stands registered against the respondent and his family members, in which proceedings are pending before the Illaqa Magistrate, Jagadhri. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant further contends that the applicant is residing with her parents at Village Sadhaura, District Yamunanagar, and the purpose of filing the petition under Section 13 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. Savita, the applicant-wife, is residing at Yamunanagar. The respondent-husband filed a petition under Section 13 of the Act, which is pending before learned Additional District & 2 TA No.404 of 2011(O&M) Sessions, Karnal. 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 Karnal. 8. Considering the fact that the applicant is a resident of Yamunanagar 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 13 of the Act titled as ‘Pawan Vs. Savita’ is withdrawn from the Court of learned Additional District Judge, Karnal, and is transferred to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Yamunanagar. The entire record pertaining to the petition under Section 13 of the Act shall be sent by the trial Court at Karnal to the learned District Judge, Yamunanagar, within three weeks, who will either himself dispose it of or entrust it to any other Court of competent jurisdiction at Yamunanagar. 10. The parties shall appear before the Court of competent jurisdiction at Yamunanagar, on 22.10.2011. 07.09.2011 (JITENDRA CHAUHAN) atulsethi JUDGE Note : Whether to be referred to Reporter ? Yes / No 3