TA No.182 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH TA No.182 of 2011 Date of decision : 27.07.2011 Rajni @ Shardha ...Applicant Versus Nitish Kumar ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN Present: Mr. N.S. Shekhawat, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. Yash Dev Kaushik, 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 ‘Nitish Kumar Vs. Rajni @ Shardha’, filed by the respondent under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short `the Act'), from the learned trial Court, Faridabad, to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Rewari. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant contends that there has been a history of physical and mental assault on the applicant at the hands of the respondent-husband. On her complaint, FIR No.148 dated 21.6.2010, under Sections 498-A, 406, 323, 506, 34, IPC, stands registered against the respondent and proceedings therein are pending TA No.182 of 2011 2 at Rewari. Two petitions, viz., under Section 125 Cr.P.C. and under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, are also pending before the Courts at Rewari. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant further contends that earlier also, the respondent had filed a petition under Section 9 of the Act, which was subsequently dismissed as withdrawn. Now, the respondent has filed petition under Section 13 of the Act, only with a view to harass the applicant. 4. The learned counsel for the respondent has vehemently opposed the prayer. 5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 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. Rajni @ Shardha, the applicant-wife, is residing at Rewari. The respondent-husband filed a petition under Section 13 of the Act, which is pending before learned Additional District Judge, Faridabad. It would certainly be difficult for the wife, who herself is an TA No.182 of 2011 3 orphan and saddled with the responsibility of raising her infant daughter, to attend the court proceedings at Rewari, which is at a distance of about 100 kms. from the place of her residence. 8. Considering the fact that the applicant is a resident of Faridabad, 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 ‘Nitish Kumar Vs. Rajni @ Shardha’ is withdrawn from the learned trial Court at Faridabad, and is transferred to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Rewari. The entire record pertaining to the petition under Section 13 of the Act shall be sent by the trial Court at Faridabad to the learned District Judge, Rewari, within three weeks, who will either himself dispose it of or entrust it to any other Court of competent jurisdiction at Rewari. 10. The parties shall appear before the learned District Judge, Rewari, on 27.08.2011. 27.07.2011 (JITENDRA CHAUHAN) atulsethi JUDGE Note : Whether to be referred to Reporter ? Yes / No