TA No.404 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH TA No.404 of 2010 Date of decision : 11.03.2011 Jasbir Kaur ...Applicant Versus Gurpreet Singh ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN Present: Mr. H.S. Jaswal, Advocate for the applicant. Respondent ex parte. JITENDRA CHAUHAN, J. (Oral) 1. Jasbir Kaur, the applicant-wife, has preferred the instant application filed under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, for transfer of petition titled as ‘Gurpreet Singh Vs. Jasbir Kaur’, filed by the respondent under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short `the Act'), from the Court of learned Additional District Judge, Fatehgarh Sahib, to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Panchkula. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has filed a criminal complaint under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. which is pending adjudication before the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Panchkula. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant further contends that the TA No.404 of 2010 2 applicant is a resident of Panchkula and the purpose of filing the petition under Section 13 of the Act is only to harass the applicant. She also apprehends threat at the hands of the respondent-husband. 4. The service of the respondent is complete, however, none has put in appearance on his behalf. Accordingly, the respondent is proceeded against ex parte. 5. I have heard the learned counsel for the applicant and perused the record. 6. Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Neelam Kanwar vs Devinder Singh Kanwar, 2001(1) M.L.J. 509 (SC), has observed as under:- “We are mindful of the fact that the petitioner is a lady and first respondent is a male, and, therefore, (for) convenience of wife, a transfer to the place where the lady is residing, would be preferred by this Court unless, it is shown that there are special reason not to do so. No special reason is shown.” 7. Jasbir Kaur, the applicant-wife, is residing at Panchkula. The respondent-husband filed a petition under Section 13 of the Act, which is pending before learned Additional District Judge, Fatehgarh Sahib. It would certainly be difficult for the wife, living at the mercy of her parents and having no source of income, to attend the court proceedings at Fatehgarh Sahib. 8. Considering the fact that the applicant is a resident of Panchkula and primarily, the convenience of the wife is to be seen, TA No.404 of 2010 3 therefore, in my opinion, the balance of convenience is in favour of the applicant-wife and against the respondent. Accordingly, the petition filed by the respondent titled as ‘Gurpreet Singh Vs. Jasbir Kaur’ under Section 13 of the Act, pending in the Court of learned Additional District Judge, Fatehgarh Sahib, deserves to be transferred to Panchkula. 9. In view of the above, the instant transfer application is allowed and the petition under Section 13 of the Act titled as ‘Gurpreet Singh Vs. Jasbir Kaur’ is withdrawn from the Court of learned Additional District Judge, Fatehgarh Sahib, and is transferred to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Panchkula. The entire record pertaining to the petition under Section 13 of the Act shall be sent by the trial Court at Fatehgarh Sahib to the learned District Judge, Panchkula, within three weeks, who will either himself dispose it of or entrust it to any other Court of competent jurisdiction. 10. The parties shall appear before the Court of learned District Judge, Panchkula, on 08.04.2011. 11.03.2011 (JITENDRA CHAUHAN) atulsethi JUDGE Note : Whether to be referred to Reporter ? Yes / No