TA No.455 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH TA No.455 of 2011 Date of decision : 08.11.2011 Smt. Sudha ...Applicant Versus Atul Sharma ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN Present: Mr. Manohar Lal, Advocate for the applicant. Respondent ex parte. JITENDRA CHAUHAN, J. (Oral) 1. The present application has been preferred by the applicant- wife, under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, praying for the transfer of the petition titled as ‘Atul Sharma Vs. Smt. Sudha’, 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, Rohtak, to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Panchkula. 2. None has caused appearance on behalf of the respondent despite service. In the circumstances, the respondent is proceeded against ex parte. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant contends that on the complaint made by the applicant, FIR No.205 dated 1.12.2009 stands TA No.455 of 2011 2 registered against the respondent and his family members. He is already appearing before the trial Court at Panchkula. The learned counsel for the applicant further contends that the petition filed by the respondent is a counterblast to the FIR registered by her. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant further contends that the 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. 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, convenience- wise, a transfer to the place where the lady is residing, would be preferred by this Court unless it is shown that there are special reasons not to do so. No such special reason is shown.” 7. Smt. Sudha, 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, Rohtak. It would certainly be difficult for the wife, living at the mercy of her parents, to attend the court proceedings at Rohtak, which is at a distance of about 300 kms. from the place of her residence. Furthermore, the respondent-husband is already attending the TA No.455 of 2011 3 proceedings in criminal case at Panchkula. 8. Considering the fact that the applicant is a resident of Panchkula. The complaint filed by her is prior in time. In the petition filed by the husband against the wife, primarily the convenience of the wife is to be seen, therefore, in my opinion, the balance of convenience is in favour of the applicant-wife and against the respondent. 9. In view of the above, the instant transfer application is allowed and the petition under Section 13 of the Act titled as ‘Atul Sharma Vs. Smt. Sudha’ is withdrawn from the Court of learned Additional District Judge, Rohtak, 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 Rohtak, 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 at Panchkula. 10. The parties shall appear before the learned District Judge, Panchkula, on 17.12.2011. 08.11.2011 (JITENDRA CHAUHAN) atulsethi JUDGE Note : Whether to be referred to Reporter ? Yes / No