TA No.531 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH TA No.531 of 2010 (O&M) Date of decision : 07.01.2011 Kela Devi ...Applicant Versus Sukhbir Singh ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN Present: Mr. Saurabh Garg, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. Vikram Dhakla, Advocate, for the respondent. JITENDRA CHAUHAN, J. (Oral) 1. This is an application for transfer of petition titled as `Sukhbir Singh V. Kela Devi’ (Annexure P-2), filed under Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short `the Act') from the Court of Additional District Judge at Jagadhri to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Hissar. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has filed a petition under Section 18 and 20 of the Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956, claiming maintenance for herself and the minor children, which is pending adjudication before the Court of learned District Judge (Family Court), Hissar. She has also filed a TA No.531 of 2010 2 petition under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, which is also pending adjudication before the Court of learned JMIC, Hissar. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant further contends that the applicant is a resident of Hissar. She has further contended that the purpose of filing the petition (Annexure P-2), at Karnal, is only to harass the applicant and to pressurize her to withdraw the petition filed by her. She has three children out of which two are minor and school- going. Nobody is there to look after them when she goes to attend the Court at Karnal. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent has vehemently opposed the prayer. 5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. 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. Kela Devi, applicant-wife, is residing at Hissar. The respondent-husband filed a petition under Section 13 of the Act, which is pending before learned District Judge, Karnal. It would certainly be TA No.531 of 2010 3 difficult for the wife, who looking after her three dependent children, to attend the court proceedings at Karnal. 8. Considering the fact that the applicant is a resident of Hissar and it is the convenience of the wife to be seen, in my opinion, the petition filed by the respondent titled as 'Sukhbir Singh V. Smt. Kela Devi' under Section 13 of the Act, pending in the Court of Additional District Judge, Karnal, deserves to be transferred to Hissar. 9. In view of the above, the instant transfer application is allowed, the petition under Section 13 of the Act titled as ‘Sukhbir Singh V. Smt. Kela Devi’ is withdrawn from the Court of Additional District Judge, Karnal, and is transferred to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Hissar. File of the petition shall be sent by the trial Court at Karnal to learned District Judge, Hissar, who will either himself dispose it of or entrust it to any Court of competent jurisdiction. The parties shall appear before the Court of competent jurisdiction at Hissar on 29.01.2011. 10. Since the main application stands allowed, CM application(s) pending, if any, shall stand disposed of accordingly. 7.1.2011 (JITENDRA CHAUHAN) atulsethi JUDGE Note : Whether to be referred to Reporter ? Yes / No