TA No.137 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH TA No.137 of 2011 Date of decision : 26.04.2011 Ranjit Kaur ...Applicant Versus Jaspal Singh ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN Present: Mr. R.S. Pandher, Advocate for the applicant. None for the respondent. JITENDRA CHAUHAN, J. (Oral) 1. The present application has been preferred by the applicant- wife under Section 23(2) read with Sections 22 and 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, praying for the transfer of the petition titled as ‘Jaspal Singh Vs. Ranjit Kaur and another’, filed by the respondent under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short `the Act'), from the Court of learned Additional District Judge, Fatehgarh Sahib, to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Sangrur. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant contends that after having been ousted by the respondent from her matrimonial home, the applicant is presently residing at Village Bhalwan, Tehsil Dhuri, District Sangrur. TA No.137 of 2011 2 3. The learned counsel further submits that the respondent is not even complying with the orders passed by the learned JMIC, Dhuri, in the petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. filed by the applicant. She is not in employment and after being turned out by the respondent from her matrimonial home, has been residing with her parents. She has no means to go to Fatehgarh Sahib. The father of the applicant is a labourer. There is no other male member to accompany the applicant to Fatehgarh Sahib to contest the case filed by the respondent. Even if some male member accompanies the applicant, it will entail further expenses upon her. 4. Nobody has caused appearance on behalf of the respondent. Accordingly, he 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. Ranjit Kaur, the applicant-wife, is residing at District Sangrur. The respondent-husband filed a petition under Section 13 of TA No.137 of 2011 3 the Act, which is pending before learned Additional District Judge, Fatehgarh Sahib. It would certainly be difficult for the wife, living at the mercy of her parents and having no source of income, to attend the court proceedings at Fatehgarh Sahib. 8. Considering the fact that the applicant is a resident of Distt. Sangrur 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. 9. In view of the above, the instant transfer application is allowed and the petition under Section 13 of the Act titled as ‘Jaspal Singh Vs. Ranjit Kaur and another’ is withdrawn from the Court of learned Additional District Judge, Fatehgarh Sahib, and is transferred to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Sangrur. The entire record pertaining to the petition under Section 13 of the Act shall be sent by the trial Court at Fatehgarh Sahib to the learned District Judge, Sangrur, 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, Sangrur, on 26.05.2011. 26.04.2011 (JITENDRA CHAUHAN) atulsethi JUDGE Note : Whether to be referred to Reporter ? Yes / No