IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH TA No. 116 of 2007 Decided on : 20-02-2009 Monika ....Applicant VERSUS Ashok Kumar ....Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER Present:- Mr. S.S.Majithia, Advocate for the applicant. Mr A.K.Khunger, Advocate for the respondent. MAHESH GROVER, J During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant is not willing to join the respondent husband in his matrimonial home. It is apparent that the proceedings initiated by the respondent which are sought to be transferred are pursuant to Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act are an exercise in futility. In view of the stand taken by the learned counsel for the applicant, even if the decree is passed against her, it would hardly be of any consequence. Learned counsel for the applicant during the course of arguments has candidly argued that the only reason for getting the proceedings transferred is that the respondent husband will be pressurized if he is made to commute between Bathinda and Chandigarh. I am afraid, this is not a ground to transfer the present petition. Dismissed. February 20, 2009 (Mahesh Grover) rekha Judge