T.A.No. 475 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH T.A.No. 475 of 2011 Date of decision 16.9.2011 Seema Puri ...Applicant versus Linkan Puri ...Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN Present: Ms. Kamalpreet, Advocate for the applicant None for the respondent .... JITENDRA CHAUHAN.J This is an application filed under section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure for transferring the petition titled “ Linkan Puri v. Seema Puri” under section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act,1955, (for short the 'Act') from the Court of Civil Judge (Jr.Division), Ludhiana to the courts of competent jurisdiction at Panchkula. Learned counsel for the applicant-wife submits that marriage between the parties was solemnized on 20.7.2003 and a girl child was born on 22.10.2006. The applicant was subjected to harassment and maltreatment for bringing insufficient dowry. Due to non-fulfillment of demands by the applicant's family, she was compelled to leave the matrimonial home on 13.5.2008 and since then she is residing with her parents at Panchkula. Applicant-wife is unemployed and is having no source of income. He submitted that the petitions filed by the wife under section 125 Cr.P.C and under sections 406/498-A/323/506/120 IPC are pending in District Courts at Panchkula. T.A.No. 475 of 2011 2 None has put in appearance on behalf of the respondent- husband to rebut the allegations. I have heard the learned counsel for the appellant and perused the file. The applicant is residing at Panchkula at the mercy of her parents. She has no resources to look after her minor daughter. Respondent- husband has not cared to pay her maintenance. It would certainly be difficult for the applicant-wife to go to Ludhiana to attend the court proceedings with her minor daughter, as it will add financial burden on the applicant. It is well settled principle of law that the convenience of the wife has to be kept in view in such like matters as has been held in cases of Sumitra Singh v. Kumar Sanjay and another, AIR 2002 SC 396 and Neelam Kanwar v. Devinder Singh Kanwar,2001(1) M.L.J.509 (SC). The respondent is facing proceedings in the Court at Panchkula. No prejudice is going to be caused to the respondent-husband by appearing in the Courts at Panchkula. Therefore, it would be in the interest of justice if petition filed by the respondent-husband under section 9 of the Act is transferred to the courts of competent jurisdiction at Panchkula. In view of the above, the present application is allowed and the petition titled “Linkan Puri v. Seema Puri” filed under section 9 of the Act, is withdrawn from the court of Civil Judge (Jr.Division) Ludhiana and is transferred to the court of competent jurisdiction at Panchkula. File shall be sent by the trial court at Ludhiana to the District Judge, Panchkula within two weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order, who will either himself dispose it of or entrust the same to any other court of competent jurisdiction at Panchkula. T.A.No. 475 of 2011 3 Parties are directed to appear before the District Judge, Panchkula on 31.10.2011. (JITENDRA CHAUHAN) JUDGE 16.9.2011 MS