TA Nos.544 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH TA No.544 of 2011 Date of decision : 18.11.2011 Balwinder Kaur ...Applicant Versus Gurmel Singh ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN Present: None. 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 ‘Gurmel Singh Vs. Balwinder Kaur’, filed by the respondent under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short `the Act'), from the Court of learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Barnala, to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Panchkula. 2. There is no assistance on behalf of the parties. 3. A perusal of the file reveals that the applicant and her sister are married to the respondent and his brother, respectively. It is alleged that soon after the marriage, the applicant and her sister were harassed and given beatings by the in-laws’ family on account of demand of dowry. Several complaints were lodged before the Police authorities, TA Nos.544 of 2011 2 one of such complaint is attached as Annexure P1, the complaint moved to the SSP, Barnala. The matter was also referred to the Women Cell and the Punjab Human Rights Commission. 4. It is further averred that as a counterblast to the aforesaid proceedings, the petition under Section 9 of the Act has been filed by the respondent at Barnala. The applicant is a resident of Panchkula, and the purpose of filing the petition under Section 13 of the Act is only to harass the applicant. 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, convenience- wise, a transfer to the place where the lady is residing, would be preferred by this Court unless it is shown that there are special reasons not to do so. No such special reason is shown.” 6. Smt. Balwinder Kaur, the applicant-wife, is residing at Panchkula. The respondent-husband filed a petition under Section 9 of the Act, which is pending before learned Civil Judge, Sr. Divn., Barnala. It would certainly be difficult for the wife, living at the mercy of her parents, saddled with the responsibility of raising her two minor sons and having no source of income, to attend the court proceedings at Barnala, which is at a distance of about 200 kms. from the place of her residence. TA Nos.544 of 2011 3 7. Considering the fact that the applicant is a resident of Panchkula and in a petition filed by the husband against the wife, 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. 8. In view of the above, the instant transfer application is allowed and the petition under Section 9 of the Act titled as ‘Gurmel Singh Vs. Balwinder Kaur’ is withdrawn from the Court of learned Civil Judge, Sr. Divn., Barnala, and is transferred to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Panchkula. The entire record pertaining to the petition under Section 9 of the Act shall be sent by the trial Court at Barnala to the learned District Judge, Panchkula, within three weeks, who will either himself dispose it of or entrust it to any other Court of competent jurisdiction at Panchkula. 9. The parties shall appear before the learned District Judge, Panchkula, on 17.12.2011 at 10.00 a.m. 18.11.2011 (JITENDRA CHAUHAN) atulsethi JUDGE Note : Whether to be referred to Reporter ? Yes / No