TA No.318 of 2011 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH TA No.318 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision : 08.09.2011 Anupam Kataria ...Applicant Versus Gaurav Kataria ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN Present: Mr. Saurabh Bajaj, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. R.S. Mamli, Advocate, for the respondent. JITENDRA CHAUHAN, J. (Oral) CM No.21569-CII of 2011 The CM application is allowed and the reply filed on behalf of the respondent is taken on record. Main case 1. The present application has been filed under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, praying for the transfer of the petition titled as ‘Gaurav Kataria Vs. Anupam Kataria’, filed by the respondent under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short `the Act'), from the Court of learned District Judge, Kurukshetra, to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Karnal. TA No.318 of 2011 (O&M) 2 2. The learned counsel contends that the applicant was ousted from the matrimonial home by the respondent along with her 16 month old daughter. Many Panchayats were convened at the behest of the applicant to sort out the differences but the matter could not be settled due to the conduct of the respondents. The applicant apprehends danger to her life at the hands of the respondent in case she appears before the Court at Kurukshetra. It is further submitted that there is no male member in the family of the applicant except the father, who suffers from hearing impairment. 3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent states that the distance is about 35 kms. between the two stations and no prejudice would be caused in case the applicant appears at Kurukshetra. The learned counsel further contends that the evidence of the respondent stands completed. 4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties at some length. 5. This is a petition under Section 13 of the Act filed by the respondent-husband. In a petition filed by the husband, the convenience of the wife cannot be ignored. The learned counsel for the applicant has contradicted the statement made by the learned counsel for the respondent and states that the evidence of the respondent is not yet complete. 6. The applicant is residing at the mercy of her old parents after having been ousted from the matrimonial home. She is saddled with the responsibility of raising her infant daughter born out of the TA No.318 of 2011 (O&M) 3 wedlock. The applicant is a teacher, thus, it is an additional circumstance in favour of the applicant. In case she goes on leave, the studies of her students would definitely suffer. Otherwise also, in the matrimonial cases, primarily, the convenience of the wife is to be seen. 7. In view of the above, the instant transfer application is allowed and the petition under Section 13 of the Act titled as ‘Gaurav Kataria Vs. Anupam Kataria’ is withdrawn from the Court of learned District Judge, Kurukshetra, and is transferred to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Karnal. The entire record pertaining to the petition under Section 13 of the Act shall be sent by the trial Court at Kurukshetra, to the learned District Judge, Karnal, within three weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, who will either himself dispose it of or entrust it to any other Court of competent jurisdiction at Karnal. 8. The parties shall appear before the learned District Judge, Karnal, on 12.10.2011. 08.09.2011 (JITENDRA CHAUHAN) atulsethi JUDGE Note : Whether to be referred to Reporter ? Yes / No