TA No. 527 of 2010 (1) In the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh TA No. 527 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision : 3.1.2011 Menka Rani @ Mona ... Applicant vs Happy Kumar .... Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal Present: Mr. Mohd. Yousaf, Advocate, for the applicant. Mr. Onkar Singh, Advocate, for the respondent. Rajesh Bindal J. Prayer in the application is for transfer of the divorce petition filed by the husband at Ludhiana to Bathinda. It is submitted by the applicant that the marriage of the parties was solemnised on 17.3.2009 as per Sikh rites (Anand Karaj). Out of the wedlock, one son was born, who is residing with the mother. Her father is a labourer. She has no source of income. She was turned out of the matrimonial home as she had brought insufficient dowry. She is residing in the house of her maternal uncle along with her minor son at Bathinda. Whereas the husband is working as Mechanic in a factory at Ludhiana. The petition for divorce has been filed by the husband at Ludhiana only to harass the applicant wife. The distance from Bathinda to Ludhiana is more than 100 kilometers. It is submitted that there is no one to look after the child and it is very difficult for her to attend the proceedings at Ludhiana. The respondent-husband is attending the proceedings in the petition filed by the wife under Section 125 Cr.P.C. at Talwandi Sabo, District Bathinda. As the husband is already attending the aforesaid case at Talwandi Sabo, it will not be difficult for him to attend these proceedings at Bathinda. On the other hand, the respondent denied the allegations levelled in the application against him but to the difficulties to be faced by the wife to attend the proceedings along with minor child could not be disputed by him. It was submitted that earlier a case under Section 107/151 Cr.P.C. was got falsely registered by the applicant wife at Maur Mandi against the respondent. Maternal uncle of the wife is residing at Bathinda. Therefore, he apprehends that if the case is transferred at Bathinda, he will again be dragged into false litigation. TA No. 527 of 2010 (2) Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the paper-book. It is not disputed by the learned counsel for the respondent that the wife is now residing at Bathinda with minor child. It is very difficult for her to attend the proceedings at Ludhiana along with minor child. However, he apprehends that if the case is transferred at Bathinda, he will again be dragged into false litigation The issue regarding transfer of matrimonial proceedings almost in similar circumstances came up for consideration before this Court as well in a number of cases earlier. It has been the consistent view that primarily the convenience of the wife is to be given weightage for ordering transfer of proceedings at or near the place where she is residing. However, I find force in the above submission of learned counsel for the respondent that the respondent has serious apprehension that if the case is transferred at Bathinda, he will be involved in some criminal case, as the past experience was. Accordingly, the divorce petition filed by the husband at Ludhiana is transferred to Mansa. Parties are directed to appear before the District Judge, Mansa, on 15.2.2011 for further proceedings. The District Judge, Mansa may either keep it with him or entrust the same to any other competent Court. The application stands disposed of accordingly. 3.1.2011 (Rajesh Bindal) vs Judge