TA No.108 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH TA No.108 of 2011 Date of decision : 17.03.2011 Sudesh ...Applicant Versus Manish ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN Present: Mr. Anshumaan Dalal, Advocate for the applicant. Respondent ex parte. JITENDRA CHAUHAN, J. (Oral) 1. Smt. Sudesh, the applicant-wife, has preferred the instant application under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, for transfer of the petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short `the Act'), titled as ‘Manish Vs. Sudesh’ from the Court of learned District Judge, Family Court, Gurgaon, to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Rohtak. 2. The learned counsel for the applicant contends that the trial in the FIR No.494 dated 13.07.2010 under Section 498-A, 406, 323, 506 IPC registered against the respondent at the behest of the applicant, is pending at Rohtak. 3. The learned counsel for the applicant further contends that TA No.108 of 2011 2 the applicant is a resident of Rohtak and the purpose of filing the petition under Section 13 of the Act is only to harass the applicant. She is residing with her parents along with the minor son born out of the wedlock between the parties. The father of the applicant is an old man and there is no other member in the family to accompany her to Gurgaon to defend her case. 4. None has caused appearance on behalf of the respondent despite service. 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. Smt. Sudesh, the applicant-wife, is residing at Rohtak. The respondent-husband filed a petition under Section 13 of the Act, which is pending before learned District Judge, Family Court, Gurgaon. It would certainly be difficult for the wife, living at the mercy of her parents, having no source of income and saddled with the responsibility TA No.108 of 2011 3 of raising her minor son, to attend the court proceedings at Gurgaon. 8. Considering the fact that the applicant is a resident of Rohtak and 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. Accordingly, the petition filed by the respondent titled as ‘Manish Vs. Sudesh’ under Section 13 of the Act, pending in the Court of learned District Judge, Family Court, Gurgaon, deserves to be transferred to Rohtak. 9. In view of the above, the instant transfer application is allowed and the petition under Section 13 of the Act titled as ‘Manish Vs. Sudesh’ is withdrawn from the Court of learned District Judge, Family Court, Gurgaon, and is transferred to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Rohtak. The entire record pertaining to the petition under Section 13 of the Act, shall be sent by the trial Court at Gurgaon to the learned District Judge, Rohtak, 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, Rohtak, on 19.04.2011. 17.03.2011 (JITENDRA CHAUHAN) atulsethi JUDGE Note : Whether to be referred to Reporter ? Yes / No