IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Transfer Application No. 172 of 2009 Date of decision : December 17, 2009 Navdeep Kaur ....Petitioner versus Tej Pal Singh ....Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice L.N. Mittal Present : Mr. DR Singla, Advocate for Mr. Inderjit Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner Mr. KS Dhillon, Advocate, for the respondent L.N. Mittal, J. (Oral) Navdeep Kaur has filed this transfer petition under section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure for transfer of divorce petition no. 65 of 2009 filed by respondent Tej Pal Singh against the petitioner, from the court at Jalandhar to the court at Chandigarh, alleging that the petitioner is residing in Manimajra, Chandigarh and she also has minor son with her born out of the wedlock between the parties and if the petitioner goes to Jalandhar to defend the aforesaid divorce petition, the petitioner apprehends that she would be physically manhandled by the respondent as it so happened earlier. Reply on behalf of respondent filed today in Court is taken on record. Copy given to the counsel opposite. Transfer Application No. 172 of 2009 -2- I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case file. Learned counsel for the respondent contended that in FIR lodged by the petitioner, the respondent has been acquitted and revision petition preferred against the judgment of acquittal has also since been dismissed by this Court. On the other hand, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that distance between Jalandhar and Chandigarh is about 175 kilometers and the petitioner also has minor son with her and therefore, it is highly difficult and inconvenient for the petitioner to go to Jalandhar to defend the divorce petition. It was also contended that the petitioner apprehends physical violence on going to Jalandhar. Learned counsel for the respondent contended that respondent is employed with Property Dealer on salary of Rs 3000/- per month only and therefore, it would be difficult for the respondent to pursue his divorce petition at Chandigarh and witnesses also have to come from Jalandhar. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that even the petitioner would face the same difficulty in leading her evidence at Jalandhar. I have carefully considered the rival contentions. The petitioner has minor son with her. The petitioner is lady. It would be highly inconvenient for her to go to Jalandhar to defend the divorce petition. Moreover, she apprehends physical danger to herself at Jalandhar. In such cases, convenience of the wife has to be seen as per judgments of Hon'ble Apex Court. Transfer Application No. 172 of 2009 -3- In view of the aforesaid, the instant petition is allowed and divorce petition No. 65 of 2009, titled “Tej Pal Singh versus Navdeep Kaur” is transferred from the court of learned District Judge, Jalandhar to the court of learned District Judge, Chandigarh who shall be at liberty to keep the case with himself or to assign the same to another Additional District Judge, Chandigarh. Parties are directed to appear before the learned District Judge, Chandigarh on 25.1.2010. ( L.N. Mittal ) December 17, 2009 Judge 'dalbir'