TA No.534 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH TA No.534 of 2011 Date of decision : 14.11.2011 Baljit Kaur ...Applicant Versus Mandeep Singh ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN Present: Mr. K.S. Dhillon, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. H.S. Thiara, 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 ‘Mandeep Singh Vs. Baljit Kaur’, filed by the respondent under Section 12 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short `the Act'), from the Court of learned Additional District Judge, Patiala, 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 of learned ACJM, Jalandhar. The learned counsel further contends that criminal proceedings under TA No.534 of 2011 2 Sections 406, 498-A, IPC, against the respondent are also pending at Jalandhar. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant further contends that the applicant is a resident of Jalandhar, and the purpose of filing the petition under Section 12 of the Act is only to harass the applicant. 4. The learned counsel for the respondent has opposed the prayer of the applicant. 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, convenience- wise, a transfer to the place where the lady is residing, would be preferred by this Court unless it is shown that there are special reasons not to do so. No such special reason is shown.” 7. Smt. Baljit Kaur, the applicant-wife, is residing at Jalandhar. The respondent-husband filed a petition under Section 12 of the Act, which is pending before learned Additional District Judge, Patiala. It would certainly be difficult for the wife to attend the court proceedings at Patiala, which is at a distance of about 160 kms. from the place of her residence. The petitions filed by the applicant-wife are prior in time and the respondent-husband is already appearing therein. TA No.534 of 2011 3 8. Considering the fact that the applicant is a resident of Jalandhar, in the petition filed by the husband, 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 12 of the Act titled as ‘Mandeep Singh Vs. Baljit Kaur’ is withdrawn from the Court of learned Additional District Judge, Patiala, and is transferred to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Jalandhar. The entire record pertaining to the petition under Section 12 of the Act shall be sent by the trial Court at Patiala, 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 17.12.2011 at 10.00 a.m. 14.11.2011 (JITENDRA CHAUHAN) atulsethi JUDGE Note : Whether to be referred to Reporter ? Yes / No