IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH TA No.43 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision:14.12.2010 Smt. Rajni ....Petitioner versus Kamlesh Kumar ...Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN ---- Present: Mr. Jagat Singh, Advocate, for the petitioner. None for the respondent. ---- 1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2. To be referred to the reporters or not ? 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest ? ---- K.Kannan, J.(Oral) 1. Counsel for the applicant states that the respondent is deliberately avoiding the service and the service has been made through counsel. He points out that the respondent had earlier filed a petition under Section 13 which was ordered to be transferred after service of notice to the counsel. The said petition had been dismissed for default and again a fresh petition has been filed. Counsel points out that the earlier petition had been transferred from Sonepat to Bhiwani and after allowing the petition to be dismissed for default, he has again filed the petition on the same grounds and, therefore, seeks for a transfer from the Court at Bhiwani for the same reasons that found favour with this Court previously. The petition for divorce filed by the respondent is ordered to TA No.43 of 2010 (O&M) - 2 - be transferred. The petition filed by the husband and pending before the Family Court at Sonepat is withdrawn and is directed to be transferred to the Family Court at Bhiwani. 2. For appearance of parties before the Family Court at Bhiwani on 21.01.2011. (K.KANNAN) JUDGE 14.12.2010 sanjeev