TA No.162 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH TA No.162 of 2011 Date of decision : 06.07.2011 Smt. Munesh Devi ...Applicant Versus Sukhwinder Singh ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN Present: Mr. Sukhdeep Parmar, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. Sandeep Goyal, Advocate, for Mr. Jagdish Manchanda, 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 ‘Sukhwinder Singh Vs. Smt. Munesh Devi’, filed by the respondent under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short `the Act'), from the Court of learned District Judge, Karnal, to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Panipat. 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 3`. From the record, it is made out that three cases, i.e., FIR No.340 dated 27.12.2009, petition under Section 12 of the Protection TA No.162 of 2011 2 of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, and petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C., are pending at Panipat, in which the respondent is already appearing. All these three petitions are prior in time. The applicant is without any resources and living at the mercy of her parents at Panipat, whereas the husband is in the Government job and a person of resources. 4. 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.” 5. Keeping in view the fact that three petitions are pending at Panipat and the respondent-husband is already appearing in those petitions, it would be in the interest of both the parties if the instant transfer application is allowed and the petition under Section 13 of the Act titled as ‘Sukhwinder Singh Vs. Munesh Devi’ is withdrawn from the Court of learned District Judge, Karnal, and is transferred to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Panipat. Ordered accordingly. 6. The entire record pertaining to the petition under Section 13 of the Act shall be sent by the trial Court at Karnal to the learned District Judge, Panipat, within three weeks, who will either TA No.162 of 2011 3 himself dispose it of or entrust it to any other Court of competent jurisdiction at Panipat. 7. The parties shall appear before the learned District Judge, Panipat, on 08.08.2011. 06.07.2011 (JITENDRA CHAUHAN) atulsethi JUDGE Note : Whether to be referred to Reporter ? Yes / No