T.A.No. 168 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH T.A.No. 168 of 2011 Date of decision 30.5.2011 Smt.Vandana ...Applicant versus Krishan Kumar ...Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN Present: Mr.Aman Pal,Advocate for the applicant Mr.H.S.Sahu,Advocate for the respondent .... JITENDRA CHAUHAN.J (ORAL) This is an application filed under section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure for transferring the petitions titled “ Krishan Kumar v. Smt.Vandana” under section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act,1955 (for short the 'Act') and under section 25 of the Guardian and Wards Act,1890 from the Courts of District Judge, and Civil Judge (Sr.Division) Jind, to the courts of competent jurisdiction at Gurgaon. Learned counsel for the applicant-wife submits that marriage between the parties was solemnized on 9.12.2003. The T.A.No. 168 of 2011 2 respondent harassed and maltreated the applicant for bringing insufficient dowry. He further submits that two children were born out of the wedlock of the parties. Due to the non-fulfillment of demands by the applicant family, she was compelled to leave the matrimonial home on 19.8.2010. Thereafter, she has been residing with her parents at Gurgaon with her two children. The applicant is unemployed and does not have any source of income. He further submits that DDR No. 39 dated 21.1.2011 was lodged by the respondent at P.S.City Jind against the applicant and her family members in order to harass her. He submitted that the applicant has filed a petition under section 125 of the Cr.P.C seeking maintenance from the respondent, which is pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class,Jind. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent- husband denied the allegation and submitted that the applicant-wife left the matrimonial home on her own in the absence of the respondent. The further submission is that rather the respondent and his family members were beaten up by the applicant family on 23.8.2010 I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record. The applicant is residing at Gurgaon at the mercy of her parents. She has no resources to look after her minor children. It would T.A.No. 168 of 2011 3 certainly be difficult for the applicant-wife to go to Jind to attend the court proceedings with her minor children, as it will add financial burden on the applicant. It is well settled principle of law that the convenience of the wife has to be kept in view in such like matters as has been held in cases of Sumitra Singh v. Kumar Sanjay and another, AIR 2002 SC 396 and Neelam Kanwar v. Devinder Singh Kanwar,2001(1) M.L.J.509 (SC). The respondent is facing proceedings in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gurgaon. No prejudice is going to be caused to the respondent-husband by appearing in the Courts at Gurgaon. He is working as Assistant Professor in Govt.College and a person of sufficient means. Therefore, it would be in the interest of justice if petitions filed by the respondent-husband under section 9 of the Act and under section 25 of the Guardian and Wards Act are transferred to the courts of competent jurisdiction at Gurgaon. In view of the above, the present application is allowed and the petitions titled “Krishan Kumar v. Smt.Vandana” under section 9 of the Act and under section 25 of the Guardians and Wards Act,1890 are withdrawn from the court of District Judge and Civil Judge (Sr.Division) Jind and are transferred to the courts of competent jurisdiction at Gurgaon. Files shall be sent by the trial court at Jind to the District Judge,Gurgaon within two weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this T.A.No. 168 of 2011 4 order, who will either dispose it of or entrust the same to any other court of competent jurisdiction at Gurgaon. Parties are directed to appear before the District Judge, Gurgaon on 18.7.2011. (JITENDRA CHAUHAN) JUDGE 30.5.2011 MS/atul Note: Whether to be referred to Reporter? Yes/No.