T.A.No. 268 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH T.A.No. 268 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision 14.9.2011 Arashdeep ...Applicant versus Ashok Kumar ...Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN Present: Mr. Manvinder Singh Sidhu, Advocate for the applicant Mr.Sanjiv Pandit, Advocate with Ashok Kumar, respondent in person .... JITENDRA CHAUHAN.J Learned counsel for the respondent filed C.M. No. 18734-CII of 2011 on 3.8.2011 to place on record Annexures R-3 and R-4. C.M. is allowed. Annexures R-3 and R-4, ( newly wedded photographs of the applicant with some other person ) are taken on record. This is an application filed under section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure for transferring the petition (H.M.A No. 26 dated 11.8.2010), titled “ Ashok Kumar v. Arashdeep” under section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act,1955, (for short the 'Act') from the Court of Addl.District Juge,Ferozepur to the courts of competent jurisdiction at Ludhiana. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that marriage between the parties was solemnized on 28.3.2009. On account of certain differences between the parties, the wife was thrown out of the matrimonial home. She is now compelled to stay with her parents at Ludhiana. The T.A.No. 268 of 2011 2 respondent husband has filed petition under section 13 of the Act, which is pending in the Court at Ferozepur. The matter was referred to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre as there seemed chances of some amicable settlement by this Court on 30.5.2011. Vide report dated 4.7.2011 of the Mediator, the parties have failed to resolve the dispute through the process of mediation. The case was sent back to this Court. Learned counsel for the applicant contends that Annexures R-3 and R-4 are forged documents and have been manufactured by the respondent-husband. The applicant has not entered photographs, on record, on her face book. Learned counsel for the respondent states that the applicant is undergoing some training at Baddi, Himachal Pradesh and is residing there. The parties were called before this Court to ascertain the veracity of Annexures R-3 and R-4. However, the applicant did not choose to appear before this Court in pursuance of order dated 24.5.2011. The conduct of the applicant dis-entitled her of the discretionary relief sought in the present case. No merit. Dismissed. (JITENDRA CHAUHAN) JUDGE 14.9.2011 MS