TA No.245 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH TA No.245 of 2011 Date of decision : 24.05.2011 Savita ...Applicant Versus Ram Niwas ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN Present: Sh. A.K. Kansal, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. Sandeep Goyat, Advocate, for the respondent. 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 ‘Ram Niwas Vs. Savita’, filed by the respondent under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short `the Act'), from the Court of learned District Judge, (Family Courts) Hisar, to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Jind. 2. A perusal of the file would reveal that the applicant-wife has instituted a divorce petition under Section 13 of the Act against the respondent-husband, which is pending adjudication at Jind. It has been TA No.245 of 2011 2 further averred in the application that the applicant is 100% disabled and cannot walk without the help of crutches. She is working as Maths Teacher in the Government Girls Senior Secondary School at Jind. 3. On the other hand, it has been contended by the learned counsel for the respondent that he also suffers disability to the same extent. He is not in any employment and also to look after his old parents. Three cases between the parties are already pending at Jind. 4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 5. The extent of disability suffered by the parties is the same. But the fact that the applicant is in service, is a circumstances in her favour. Though, any kind of mobility is difficult for the respondent as well, but he being not in employment has not constraint of time, where as the absence of the applicant would not only cause in-convenience to her, it would adversely affect the studies of her students. In view of the physical disability of the parties, the convenience of the wife deserves to be preferred. Therefore, I am of the considered opinion that the ends of justice would be met if the present application is allowed and the petition under Section 9 of the Act titled as ‘Ram Niwas Vs. Savita’ is withdrawn from the Court of learned District Judge, (Family Courts) Hisar, and is transferred to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Jind. 6. The entire record pertaining to the petition under Section 9 of the Act shall be sent by the trial Court at Hisar to the learned District TA No.245 of 2011 3 Judge, Jind, within three weeks, who will either himself dispose it of or entrust it to any other Court of competent jurisdiction at Jind. However, as the respondent-husband is not in any employment, the applicant-wife shall pay the cost of traveling by the respondent from Hisar to Jind, in regard to the petition under Section 13 of the Act, which is quantified to `1,000/- per visit. 7. The parties shall appear before the Court of competent jurisdiction at Jind, on 24.06.2011. Ordered accordingly. 24.05.2011 (JITENDRA CHAUHAN) atulsethi JUDGE Note : Whether to be referred to Reporter ? Yes / No