IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH SHIMLA CMPMO No.123 of 2008. Date of decision: 10.09.2008. Kamla Devi …Petitioner Versus Sanjiv Kumar …Respondent Coram The Hon’ble Mr.Justice Dev Darshan Sud,J. Whether approved for reporting ?1 For the Petitioner: Mr.N.K. Sood, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr.J.L. Bhardwaj, Advocate. Dev Darshan Sud,J. This petition has been filed under Sections 20 and 21-A of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 by the petitioner-wife praying therein that the divorce petition instituted by the respondent-husband before the District Judge, Kinnaur Division at Rampur Bushahar, District Shimla, be transferred to the Court of District Judge, Mandi. The petitioner pleads that proceedings under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against the respondent for maintenance have been instituted by her and her daughter in the Court of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sundernagar and that the long distance of travel with 1 Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgement? 2 minor daughter and lack of adequate funds, has placed constraints on her to attend the case in the Court of the District Judge at Rampur. She also places reliance on a complaint having been made by her against the respondent under Sections 498-A and 506 of the Indian Penal Code in Police Station, Sundernagar to prima facie show that she apprehends danger to her safety. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner places reliance on judgment of the Supreme Court in Guda Vijayalakshmi vs. Guda Ramachandra Sekhara Sastry, AIR 1981 SC 1143, holding that the substantive provisions of Section 25 of the Code of Civil Procedure are not excluded by Section 21 of the Hindu Marriage Act and the same principle would be applied for transfer of cases. He also places reliance on Shyamali Ghosh vs. Sumit Kumar Ghosh, AIR 2000 SC 3351, holding that the inconvenience caused to the wife for traveling etc. on account of her job would form a valid ground for transferring the petition to another Court. He also places reliance on Ravinder Kaur vs. Hitinder Singh AIR 2000 SC 3403(2), Smt.Rita Barua vs. Siddartha Barua, AIR 2000 SC 3514, Munni Kumari vs. Shailendra Kumar Choudhary, AIR 2000 SC 3565(1) and Raj Laxmi Sharma vs. Dilip Kumar Sharma, AIR 2000 SC 3572. All these cases have been disposed of by the Supreme Court under Section 25 of the Code of Civil Procedure on their peculiar facts. 3 The powers exercised by this Court under Section 24 are in pera-materia with the jurisdiction of the Hon’ble Supreme Court under Section 25. The judgments cited no doubt are confined to the facts of those cases before the Court, however, the general principle cannot be denied that the inability of parties to attend day to day proceedings for reasons beyond his / her control form a valid ground for transfer of a case from one Court to another. Considering the fact that the petition under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is pending at Sundernagar, this petition is allowed. A direction is issued that H.M. Misc.Petition No.1- R/30 of 2008, titled: Sanjeev Kumar vs. Kamla Devi, pending in the Court of District Judge, Kinnaur Division at Rampur Bushahar, District Shimla shall stand transferred to the Court of District Judge at Mandi, where the parties shall appear on 23rd October, 2008. Let a copy of this order be sent to the Court of the District Judge, Rampur Bushahar and Mandi. It is further directed that the record of the case be sent to the District Judge, Mandi immediately. This petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. September 10, 2008. (Dev Darshan Sud) (aks) Judge.