T.A.No.280 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH T.A.No. 280 of 2011 Date of decision 6.7.2011 Neetu Sharda ...Applicant versus Bhawnesh Sharda ...Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN Present: Mr.G.S.Jagpal,Advocate for Mr.R.S.Bajaj,Advocate for the applicant None for the respondent .... JITENDRA CHAUHAN.J (ORAL) This is an application filed by the wife, under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure for transferring the petitions bearing No. HMA 158 of 2011, titled “ Bhawnesh Sharda v. Neetu Sharda” under section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act,1955 (for short the 'Act') from the Court of the District Judge,Amritsar to the court of competent jurisdiction at Jalandhar. Learned counsel for the applicant-wife submits that marriage between the parties was solemnized on 15.1.2005 and the applicant was subjected to harassment and maltreatment for bringing insufficient dowry. He further submits that a daughter was born out of the wedlock of the parties. Due to non-fulfillment of demands by the applicant's family, she was turned out of the matrimonial home on 18.6.2007, and since then she is residing with her parents at Jalandhar with her minor T.A.No.280 of 2011 2 daughter. He stated that applicant is unemployed and is having no source of income. The applicant filed a petition under section 125 of the Cr.P.C seeking maintenance from the respondent, which is pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class,Jalandhar. No one has put in appearance on behalf of the respondent. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record. The applicant is residing at Jalandhar at the mercy of her old parents. She has no resources to look after herself and her minor daughter. It would certainly be difficult for the applicant-wife to go to Amritsar to attend the court proceedings with her minor daughter, as it will add financial burden on the applicant. It is well settled principle of law that the convenience of the wife has to be kept in view in such like matters as has been held in cases of Sumitra Singh v. Kumar Sanjay and another, AIR 2002 SC 396 and Neelam Kanwar v. Devinder Singh Kanwar,2001(1) M.L.J.509 (SC). The respondent is facing proceedings in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jalandhar. No prejudice is going to be caused to the respondent-husband by appearing in the Courts at Jalandhar. He is working as Assistant Marketing Manager in LARS Enviro P.Ltd.Nagpur and is earning handsomely. Therefore, it would be in the interest of justice if petition filed by the respondent-husband under section 13 of the Act is transferred to the courts of competent jurisdiction at Jalandhar. In view of the above, the present application is allowed and the petitions titled “Bhawnesh Sharda v.Neetu Sharda” under section 13 of the Act is withdrawn from the court of District Judge,Amritsar and is transferred to the court of competent jurisdiction at Jalandhar. File shall be T.A.No.280 of 2011 3 sent by the trial court at Amritsar to the District Judge,Jalandhar within two weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order, who will either dispose it of or entrust the same to any other court of competent jurisdiction at Jalandhar. Parties are directed to appear before the District Judge, Jalandhar on 8.8.2011. (JITENDRA CHAUHAN) JUDGE 6.7.2011 MS Note: Whether to be referred to Reporter? Yes/No.