TA No.238 of 2008 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. TA No.238 of 2008 Date of Decision: 9.12.2008 Ajayta Jain .....Applicant Vs. Avinash Jain ....Respondent .... CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAJIVE BHALLA **** Present : Ms.Monika Goyal, Advocate for the applicant. Mr.Puneet Sharma, Advocate for the respondent. .... RAJIVE BHALLA, J (Oral) Prayer in this application is for transfer of a petition filed under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 titled as “Avinash Jain V. Ajayta Jain” pending in the Court of District Judge, Rupnagar, to a Court of competent jurisdiction at Ludhiana. Counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has to look after the minor child aged 6 years. In addition, she has filed an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C., which is being defended by the respondent. The respondent has also filed a revision petition, which is pending before the revisional Court at Ludhiana. It is submitted that in order to harass the applicant, the respondent has filed a divorce petition at Rup Nagar. Counsel for the respondent, however, submits that the respondent is a resident of Rup Nagar and as parties last resided together at Rup Nagar, the present application should be dismissed. It is submitted that the respondent apprehends danger to his person, if the divorce petition is transferred from Rup Nagar to Ludhiana. TA No.238 of 2008 2 I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the paper book. The applicant, admittedly, has to look after the welfare of a minor child aged 6 years. She has also filed a petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. for grant of maintenance against the order passed on the application filed under Section 125 Cr.P.C., the respondent has filed a revision, which is pending adjudication before the revisional Court at Ludhiana. It is, therefore, apparent that the respondent is appearing before the Courts at Ludhiana and is in fact pursuing a revision against the order granting maintenance. As a result, his apprehension that he would be physically harmed, if the divorce petition is transferred to Ludhiana, is not only incorrect but is an apparent attempt to raise a false defence. In view of what has been stated herein above, the interest of justice would require that the divorce petition filed by the respondent at Rup Nagar be transferred to a Court of competent jurisdiction at Ludhiana. In view of what has been stated herein above, the application is allowed and the case titled as “Avinash Jain Vs. Ajayta Jain” is transferred from the Court of District and Sessions Judge, Rup Nagar to the District Judge, Ludhiana. The District and Sessions Judge, Rup Nagar, is directed to forthwith transmit file of the above mentioned case to the District Judge, Ludhiana , who shall upon receipt of the case either try it himself or entrust it to a Court of competent jurisdiction. Parties are directed to appear before the District Judge, Ludhiana, on 21.1.2009. 9.11.2008 (RAJIVE BHALLA) GS JUDGE TA No.238 of 2008 3