TA No.515 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH TA No.515 of 2010 Date of decision : 28.02.2011 Jaswinder Kaur ...Applicant Versus Sukhwinder Singh and another ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN Present: Mr. Anil Chawla, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. Deepak Arora, Advocate, for the respondents. JITENDRA CHAUHAN, J. (Oral) 1. The wife, Jaswinder Kaur, has preferred this application under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, for transfer of the petition titled as ‘Sukhwinder Singh Vs. Jaswinder Kaur and another’, filed by the respondent No.1 under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short `the Act'), from the Court of learned Additional District Judge, Gurdaspur, to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Amritsar. 2. The learned counsel for the applicant contends that petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. claiming maintenance and another petition under Section 12 read with Section 17, 18, 19, 20, 22 of the Protection TA No.515 of 2010 2 of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, filed by the applicant are pending adjudication before the learned JMIC, Amritsar. 3. The learned counsel for the applicant further contends that the applicant has been ousted from the matrimonial home and is residing with her parents along with three children born out of the wedlock. 4. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent submits that the distance between Gurdaspur and Amritsar is only about 80 kms. She does not have to travel on each and every date as she is represented by the counsel. 5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. 6. Admittedly, two petitions filed by the application are prior in time. Otherwise also, the convenience of the wife is to be seen. Three children are also residing with the applicant who herself is at the mercy of her parents. She is not in employment and does not have any other source of income. 7. 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.” TA No.515 of 2010 3 8. Considering the fact that the applicant is a resident of Amritsar 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 respondents. Accordingly, the petition filed by respondent No.1-husband titled as ‘‘Sukhwinder Singh Vs. Jaswinder Kaur and another’’ under Section 13 of the Act, pending in the Court of learned Additional District Judge, Gurdaspur, deserves to be transferred to Amritsar. 9. In view of the above, the instant transfer application is allowed and the petition under Section 13 of the Act titled as ‘Sukhwinder Singh Vs. Jaswinder Kaur and another’ is withdrawn from the Court of learned Additional District Judge, Gurdaspur, and is transferred to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Amritsar. File of the petition shall be sent by the trial Court at Gurdaspur to the learned District Judge, Amritsar, 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, Amritsar, on 04.04.2011. 28.02.2011 (JITENDRA CHAUHAN) atulsethi JUDGE Note : Whether to be referred to Reporter ? Yes / No