TA No.317 of 2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH TA No.317 of 2009 Date of decision:17.1.2011 Priti Gupta ...Applicant Versus Mohit Gupta ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN Present: Mr.R.D.Gupta, Advocate, for the applicant. Ms.Kiran Bala Jain, Advocate, for the respondent. JITENDRA CHAUHAN, J. (Oral) This is an application filed under Section 24 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for transferring the petition titled as `Mohit Gupta Vs. Preeti Gupta filed under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short `the Act') from the Court of District Judge, Jalandhar to the Court competent jurisdiction at Panchkula. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant moved a petition under Section 125 Cr. P.C. at Panchkula for maintenance. He further submits that the applicant is a resident of Panchkula. It has further been submitted that divorce petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act has now been filed by the respondent only with a view to harass the applicant. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent has submitted that the complaints dated 18.8.2009 and 29.7.2009 filed by the applicant were found to be false. She has further submitted that the child is TA No.317 of 2009 2 suffering from renal pelvic PVJ obstruction and undergoing the treatment at Delhi. However, overwhelming thrust of the counsel for the respondent is that the respondent is having an apprehension that he alongwith other family members may be falsely implicated in any other case at Panchkula. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. 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.” The respondent-husband filed a petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, which is pending before learned District Judge, Jalandhar. It would certainly be difficult for the wife, living at the mercy of her parents, to attend the court proceedings at Jalandhar. Keeping in view the interest of the wife and rights of the respondent, it would be in the interest of justice, if the petition titled as `Mohit Gupta Vs. Preeti Gupta filed under Section 13 of the Act is transferred to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Chandigarh. The learned counsel for the applicant does not have any objection if the said case is transferred to the courts at Chandigarh. In view of the above, the instant transfer petition is allowed and petition under Section 13 of the Act titled as `Mohit Gupta Vs. Preeti' is withdrawn from the Court of District Judge, Jalandhar and is transferred to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Chandigarh. File shall be sent by the TA No.317 of 2009 3 trial Court at Jalandhar to the learned District Judge, Chandiarh, who will either himself dispose it of or entrust it to any other Court of competent jurisdiction. Parties are directed to appear before the District Judge, Chandigarh on 17.2.2011. 17.1.2011 (JITENDRA CHAUHAN) mk JUDGE Note: Whether to be referred to the Reporter? Yes / No