IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CMPMO No. 415 of 2009. Date of decision: 2.9.2009 Uttam Singh …..Petitioner. Vs. Kamla Devi & ors …. Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kuldip Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner : Mr. R.K.Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. Anand Sharma, Advocate, for respondents No. 1, 3 and 4. Kuldip Singh, Judge (Oral). The respondents are plaintiffs in Civil Suit No. 50 of 2009 titled Kamla Devi & ors. Vs. Uttam Singh pending in the court of Civil Judge (Junior Division) (II), Sundernagar. The petitioner has filed present petition for transferring the said suit to the court of Civil Judge, Jawali, District Kangra. 2. The facts in brief are that respondents have filed a suit for declaration and injunction that respondent No. 1 is the legally wedded wife of petitioner and respondents No. 2 to 5 are children of the petitioner and therefore, they are entitled to inherit the property of the petitioner. The suit was filed in the court of Civil Judge (Junior Division), Chachiot at Gohar, District Mandi. Later on, the suit was Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? …2… transferred to Civil Judge ( Junior Division), Court No. 2 Sundernagar on 25.3.2009 at the instance of the respondents. 3. It has been alleged that respondents are residing at Jawali and petitioner has provided them house, maintenance and education. The petitioner is also residing at Jawali. It is in the interest of both the parties that the suit is transferred from Sundernagar to Jawali. The respondent No. 1 has filed a petition, under Section 125 Cr.P.C., which is pending in the court of S.D.J.M., Jawali. The issue involved in Section 125 Cr.P.C. proceeding is whether respondent No. 1 is the legally wedded wife of the petitioner and this is also the point involved in the civil suit. On these grounds, the petitioner has filed the petition for transferring the civil suit from Sundernagar to Jawali. 4. The respondents No. 1, 4 and 5 have contested the petition. It has been denied that respondent No. 1 regularly resides at Jawali. She has been completely ignored by the petitioner and, therefore, she is living with her parents at Jhugi within the jurisdiction of civil court Sundernagar. The respondent No. 1 would be producing her witnesses at Sundernagar. The petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. was filed at Jawali under the circumstances prevailing at the time of filing of the said petition. But now circumstances have changed and she will have to take steps for transferring the petition filed by her under Section 125 Cr.P.C. from Jawali to Sundernagar. 5. Heard and perused the record. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that respondent No. 1 has filed a petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. at Jawali, therefore, civil suit may also be …3… transferred from Sundernagar to Jawali. On the contrary, respondent No. 1 has submitted that petition, under Section 125 Cr.P.C. was filed under the circumstances which were prevailing at the time of filing said petition, but now respondent No. 1 has been forced to live with her parents within the jurisdiction of civil court Sundernagar. She has also submitted that in view of change of circumstances, she is thinking of taking appropriate steps for getting the petition transferred filed by her under Section 125 Cr.P.C. from Jawali to Sundernagar. She has also submitted that she will be producing her witnesses in civil suit at Sundernagar. According to respondent No.1, the petitioner is working as Food Supply Inspector. The petitioner can defend the suit at Sundernagar, on the contrary it will be difficult for respondent No. 1 to pursue the suit at Jawali. The petitioner has not made out any case for transfer of case from Sundernagar to Jawali. 6. Resultantly, the petition fails and is accordingly dismissed. The record of the court below be returned forthwith. September 2, 2009 ( Kuldip Singh ) (Hem) Judge.