TA No.357 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH TA No.357 of 2010 Date of decision : 13.01.2011 Saroor Sharma ...Applicant Versus Rohit Sharma ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN Present: Mr. Ranjit Saini, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. A K Khunger, Advocate, for the respondent. JITENDRA CHAUHAN, J. (Oral) 1. This is an application under Section 24 of CPC for transfer of petition titled as ‘Rohit Sharma Vs. Saroor Sharma, filed by the respondent under Section 11 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short `the Act'), from the Court of learned Additional District Judge, Bhatinda, to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Tarn Taran. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has filed a criminal case under Section 406/498-A IPC which is pending adjudication before the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Tarn Taran. She has also filed a petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. claiming maintenance for herself as well as her minor children, which is pending adjudication before the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, TA No.357 of 2010 2 Tarn Taran. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant further contends that the applicant is a resident of Tarn Taran and the purpose of filing the petition under Section 11 of the Act is only to harass the applicant. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent has vehemently opposed the prayer. A written reply has been filed in Court today which is taken on record. 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. Saroor Sharma, applicant-wife, is residing at Tarn Taran. The respondent-husband filed a petition under Section 11 of the Act, which is pending before learned Additional District Judge, Bhatinda. It would certainly be difficult for the wife, living at the mercy of her parents, who is already saddled with the responsibility of raising two minor daughters, to attend the court proceedings at Bhatinda. 8. Considering the fact that the applicant is a resident of Tarn Taran and as per the Neelam Kanwar’s case (supra), it is the TA No.357 of 2010 3 convenience of the wife to be seen, in my opinion, the petition filed by the respondent titled as ‘Rohit Sharma V. Saroor Sharma’ under Section 11 of the Act, pending in the Court of learned Additional District Judge, Bhatinda, deserves to be transferred to Tarn Taran. 9. In view of the above, the instant transfer application is allowed, the petition under Section 11 of the Act titled as ‘Rohit Sharma V. Saroor Sharma’ is withdrawn from the Court of Additional District Judge, Bhatinda, and is transferred to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Tarn Taran. File of the petition shall be sent by the trial Court at Bhatinda to the Ld. District Judge, Amritsar. 10. The parties shall appear before the Court of Additional District Judge at Tarn Taran on 19.02.2011. 11. Since the main application stands allowed, the CM application(s) pending, if any, shall stand disposed of accordingly. 13.01.2011 (JITENDRA CHAUHAN) atulsethi JUDGE Note : Whether to be referred to Reporter ? Yes / No