TA No.49 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH TA No.49 of 2011 Date of decision : 19.05.2011 Sukhtinder Kaur ...Applicant Versus Sunil Kumar ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN Present: Mr. S.S. Hira, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. R.K. Bagri, Advocate, for the respondent. JITENDRA CHAUHAN, J. (Oral) 1. The present application has been preferred by the applicant- wife under Section 24(1)(b)(ii) of the Code of Civil Procedure, praying for the transfer of the petition titled as ‘Sunil Kumar Vs. Sukhtinder Kaur’, filed by the respondent under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short `the Act'), from the Court of learned Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.), Chandigarh, to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Hoshiarpur. 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. 3. The learned counsel for the respondent has produced the details of the treatment, the respondent has been taking from the TA No.49 of 2011 2 PGIMER, Chandigarh. However, as the petition under Section 9 of the Act has been moved by the respondent, the applicant-wife cannot be put to inconvenience. The wife is residing with her parents after having been ousted from the matrimonial home. The family of the respondent is stated to own two Electrical Shops where the respondent along with his brother has been carrying out the business. This shows that the financial status of the respondent is sound. 4. Keeping in view the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and particularly the medical history of the respondent, the present application is dismissed. However, the respondent shall bear the cost of traveling by the applicant from Hoshiarpur to Chandigarh, with regard to the petition under Section 9 of the Act, which is quantified to ` 2,500/- per visit. 19.05.2011 (JITENDRA CHAUHAN) atulsethi JUDGE Note : Whether to be referred to Reporter ? Yes / No