TA No.60 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH TA No.60 of 2011 Date of decision : 04.03.2011 Nishu ...Applicant Versus Saurav Gupta ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN Present: Mr. A.K. Khunger, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. Jai Bhagwan, Advocate, for the respondent. JITENDRA CHAUHAN, J. (Oral) 1. The present application has been filed under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, for transfer of the Civil Suit titled as ‘Saurav Gupta Vs. Nishu’, filed by the respondent, from the Court of learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Ludhiana, to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Phul, District Bathinda. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has filed a petition under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, which is pending adjudication before the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Phul. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant further contends that the TA No.60 of 2011 2 applicant is a resident of Rampura Phul and the Civil Suit has been filed by the respondent with a view to harass the applicant. She has no source of income. She also apprehends threat at the hands of the respondent-husband. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent has vehemently opposed the prayer. Reply in this regard has been filed today in Court, which is taken on record. 5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. 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. Nishu, applicant-wife, is residing at Rampura Phul, District Bhatinda. The respondent-husband filed a civil suit, which is pending before learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Ludhiana. 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 Ludhiana. 8. Considering the fact that the applicant is a resident of Rampura Phul, District Bhatinda, and primarily, the convenience of the TA No.60 of 2011 3 wife is to be seen, therefore, in my opinion, the balance of convenience is in favour of the applicant-wife and against the respondent. Accordingly, the civil suit filed by the respondent titled as ‘Saurav Gupta Vs. Nishu’, pending in the Court of learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Ludhiana, deserves to be transferred to Phul, District Bhatinda. 9. In view of the above, the instant transfer application is allowed and the civil suit titled as ‘Saurav Gupta Vs. Nishu’ is withdrawn from the Court of learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Ludhiana, and is transferred to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Phul, District Bhatinda. The entire record pertaining to the civil suit shall be sent by the trial Court at Ludhiana to learned District Judge, Bhatinda, within three weeks, who will entrust it to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Phul. 10. The parties shall appear before the Court of competent jurisdiction at Phul on 02.04.2011. 04.03.2011 (JITENDRA CHAUHAN) atulsethi JUDGE Note : Whether to be referred to Reporter ? Yes / No