TA No.87 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH TA No.87 of 2011 Date of decision : 27.05.2011 Charanjit Kaur ...Applicant Versus Bakshish Masih ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN Present: Mr. Arun Kumar Bakshi, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. R.K. Kapila, 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 ‘Bakshish Masih Vs. Charanjit Kaur’, filed by the respondent under Section 10 of the Divorces Act, 1869 (for short `the Act'), from the Court of learned Additional District Judge, Hoshiarpur, to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Jalandhar. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant contends that the applicant has filed a petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. which is pending adjudication before the Court at Jalandhar. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant further contends that the TA No.87 of 2011 2 applicant is presently residing at Jalandhar with her parents after having been ousted from her matrimonial home, and the purpose of filing the petition under Section 10 of the Act is only to harass the applicant. 4. The learned counsel for the respondent has vehemently opposed the prayer, inter alia, on the ground that the respondent is a Polio afflicted person. 5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties 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. The applicant-wife is residing at Jalandhar. The respondent-husband filed a petition under Section 10 of the Act, at Hoshiarpur. It would certainly be difficult for the wife, living at the mercy of her parents, having no source of income and saddled with the responsibility of raising her two minor daughters, to attend the court proceedings at Hoshiarpur. 8. Considering the fact that the applicant is a resident of TA No.87 of 2011 3 Jalandhar 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 10 of the Act titled as ‘Bakshish Masih Vs. Charanjit Kaur’ is withdrawn from the Court of learned Additional District Judge, Hoshiarpur, and is transferred to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Jalandhar. The entire record pertaining to the petition under Section 10 of the Act shall be sent by the trial Court at Hoshiarpur to the learned District Judge, Jalandhar, within three weeks, who will either himself dispose it of or entrust it to any other Court of competent jurisdiction at Jalandhar. 10. The parties shall appear before the learned District Judge, Jalandhar, on 23.07.2011. 27.05.2011 (JITENDRA CHAUHAN) atulsethi JUDGE Note : Whether to be referred to Reporter ? Yes / No