HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Transfer Application C24 No. 06 of 2011 Smt. Palvinder Kaur. …Applicant Versus Gurubachan Singh. …Respondent. Mrs. Monika Pant, holding brief of Mr. Arvind Vashishtha, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. Tanvir Alam Khan, Advocate for respondent. Dated: July 07 , 2011: Hon’ble V.K. Bist, J. Heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 2. Instant transfer application has been filed by Smt. Palvinder Kaur seeking transfer of Divorce Petition No. 172 of 2010 ‘Gurubachan Singh vs. Palvinder Kaur’, pending in the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Nainital to the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Rudrapur, District Udham Singh Nagar. 3. Grounds taken in the transfer application are that the applicant is suffering from illness, due to which it is very difficult to her to travel by bus to Nainital, as she has been advised by the doctor to avoid journey by bus or car. It is asserted that the applicant is suffering from ailment therefore, in order to reach to Nainital, she is required to travel by bus in hilly roads. It is also submitted in the transfer application that the applicant is unable to maintain herself and she is not in a position to come to Nainital on each and every occasion. 2 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that due to illness as also due to precarious financial conditions, it will not be convenient for the applicant to travel hilly reason so as to reach Nainital for doing Pairavi of the case. She has further submitted that the applicant is residing at Kashipur, whereas her husband is residing near Ramnagar and in case, said divorce petition is transferred to district Udham Singh Nagar, same will not cause any inconvenience to her husband also. She also submits that Judge, Family Court, Rudrapur is holding Camp-Court at Kashipur every month and said divorce petition can also be heard by the Camp-Court at Kashipur. 5. Mr. T.A. Khan, learned counsel for the respondent vehemently opposed the transfer application and submitted that inconvenience of the wife should not alone be seen but inconvenience of the husband should also seen simultaneously. He further submitted that, in fact the transfer application has been moved by the applicant for harassment of the respondent. He also submitted that the applicant herself moved an application in divorce petition for fixing the proceedings at Ramnagar. He submitted that in such view of the matter, the application of the petitioner seeking transfer of the divorce petition from District Nainital to District Udham Singh Nagar is misconceived and deserves to be rejected. 6. I have gone through the application moved by the applicant before the Judge, Family Court, Nainital for fixing the case at Ramnagar Court. In paragraph-3 of said application, the applicant has specifically mentioned the reasons of such fixation in which she has clearly mentioned that due to excess vomiting, the applicant 3 cannot come at hill station. I have also considered the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and I find that no inconvenience would be caused to the respondent, incase the divorce suit is transferred to the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Rudrapur District Udham Singh Nagar. Accordingly, the application is allowed. Divorce Petition No. 172 of 2010 ‘Gurubachan Singh vs. Palvinder Kaur’, pending in the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Nainital is transferred to the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Rudrapur, District Udham Singh Nagar for hearing and disposal in accordance with law. It is made clear that applicant shall not take unnecessary adjournments, which may cause inconvenience to the respondent. (V.K. Bist, J.) 07.07.2011 NCM: