TA No.574 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH TA No.574 of 2010 Date of decision : 27.04.2011 Neera Sharma ...Applicant Versus Vinod Kumar ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN Present: Mr. Sham Lal Bhalla, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. Praveen Kataria, Advocate, for the respondent. JITENDRA CHAUHAN, J. (Oral) 1. The present application has been preferred by the applicant- wife under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, praying for the transfer of the petition titled as ‘Vinod Kumar Vs. Neera Sharma’, filed by the respondent under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short `the Act'), from the Court of learned District Judge, Ferozepur, to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Fatehgarh Sahib. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant contends that earlier also, the respondent filed a petition under Section 9 of the Act at Jalalabad. However, on an application moved by the applicant, the same was transferred to Fatehgarh Sahib by this Court. TA No.574 of 2010 2 3. The learned counsel for the applicant further contends that the applicant is residing Fatehgarh Sahib after being turned out of the matrimonial home. She is working as a teacher and presently posted at the Senior Secondary School, Mandi Gobindgarh, Distt. Fatehgarh Sahib. The distance between the two places is more than 200 kms. It has been averred that there is no male member in the family who could accompany the applicant to Ferozepur. She also apprehends threat at the hands of the respondent. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent has vehemently opposed the prayer. 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. Smt. Neera Sharma, the applicant-wife, is residing at Fatehgarh Sahib. The respondent-husband filed a petition under Section 13 of the Act, which is pending before learned District Judge, Ferozepur Sahib. It would certainly be difficult for the wife, who is employed as a teacher and having no male member in the family to TA No.574 of 2010 3 accompany her, to attend the court proceedings at Ferozepur. 8. Considering the fact that the applicant is a resident of Fatehgarh Sahib and primarily, the convenience of the wife is to be seen, therefore, in my opinion, the balance of convenience is in favour of the applicant-wife and against the respondent. 9. In view of the above, the instant transfer application is allowed and the petition under Section 13 of the Act titled as ‘Vinod Kumar Vs. Neera Sharma’ is withdrawn from the Court of learned District Judge, Ferozepur and is transferred to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Fatehgarh Sahib. The entire record pertaining to the petition under Section 13 of the Act shall be sent by the trial Court at Ferozepur to the learned District Judge, Fatehgarh Sahib, within three weeks, who will either himself dispose it of or entrust it to any other Court of competent jurisdiction. 10. The parties shall appear before the Court of learned District Judge, Fatehgarh Sahib, on 27.05.2011. 27.04.2011 (JITENDRA CHAUHAN) atulsethi JUDGE Note : Whether to be referred to Reporter ? Yes / No