T.A. No. 306 of 2008 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH T.A. No. 306 of 2008 Date of decision : 30.4.2009 Rita Rani ....Petitioner Versus Simranpreet Singh ...Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER .... Present : Mr. Parminder P.Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms.Puja Chopra, Advocate for the respondent. ..... MAHESH GROVER, J. This is a petition under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure for transfer of the proceedings initiated by the respondent under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, titled as 'Simranpreet Singh v. Ramanpreet Kaur @ Reeta Rani', in the Court of District Judge, Patiala, to Ludhiana. It is the case of the petitioner that she was married to the respondent on 10.12.2006, which somehow did not work out, as a result of which proceedings filed by the respondent-husband under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act are pending at Patiala. It is further contended that she has lost her mother and has only her father who can take care of her and he is also old and infirm and, therefore, T.A. No. 306 of 2008 -2- it is very difficult for her to travel to Patiala from Ludhiana where she is residing , to attend to the Court proceedings. Reply to the petition has not been filed. However, learned counsel for the respondent has stated that the petition is frivolous and that the petitioner had effected a compromise before the Deputy Superintendent of Police and had accepted a sum of Rs.3,90,000/-. The compromise has been seriously disputed by the petitioner, who stated that initially the money was given but thereafter it was taken away from her under coercion and pressure. Be that as it may, it is not in the domain of this Court to answer the question whether the compromise has been effected or whether any fraud has been played upon the petitioner. To a pointed query as to whether she is ready to settle the matter with the respondent, the petitioner replied that she is not interested in granting divorce and she wishes to contest the divorce petition. Having regard to the aforesaid and keeping in view the fact that the petitioner has stated that she is living with her aunt and there is nobody to take care of her and further keeping in view the observations of the Supreme Court in Sumita v. Kumar Sanjay and others AIR 2002 SC 396, the petition is allowed and the proceedings under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 are transferred from Patiala to a Court of competent jurisdiction at Ludhiana, which shall issue notice to both the parties on receipt of the case. 30.4.2009 (MAHESH GROVER) JUDGE dss