Gurpreet Kaur @ Sweety v. Mohan Preet Singh @ Rinku

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH TA No.983 of 2021 (O&M) Date of decision:06.01.2023 Gurpreet Kaur @ Sweety

...Petitioner(s)

v Mohan Preet Singh @ Rinku

...Respondent(s)

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Present:- Mr. Anirudh Singh Shera, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. KS Brar, Advocate for the respondent.

*** NIDHI GUPTA, J.(ORAL) 1.

Prayer in this petition filed by petitioner-wife is for transfer of the petition bearing No.DMC-486 of 2021 filed by respondent-husband under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, titled "Mohan Preet Singh @ Rinku vs. Gurpreet Kaur @ Sweety" pending in the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Bathinda, to a court of competent jurisdiction at Faridabad.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, submits: i) that the marriage between the parties was solemnized on 05.12.2009 according to Sikh rites and rituals. ii) that two daughters were born out of this wedlock. iii) that the petitioner is residing with her aged widowed mother at Faridabad since October, 2020.

iv) that the distance between her place of residence and place of proceedings is 370 kms. (one side).

v) that the petitioner has also filed complaint under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, at Faridabad.

vi) that the petitioner has no source of income. 3.

Learned counsel for the respondent opposed the present petition and states that unlike the petitioner, the respondent is working hard as he

has to support both the daughters who are residing with him and out of them, one daughter is suffering from low mental growth as compared to physical growth. It is submitted that the respondent has to provide the children all the amenities required for their physical welfare, as also all love and emotional support is also provided only by him as their mother has deserted the matrimonial home. It is further submitted that in this situation it will be more inconvenient and problematic for him to travel to Faridabad, whereas, as the petitioner is not working and has no responsibility of the children either, therefore no inconvenience will be caused to her.

4.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties. 5.

I find merit in the submissions advanced on behalf of the respondent. This Court is well aware of the fact that preponderance of law in such-like cases of transfer emanating from matrimonial disputes is in favour of the wife. However, in view of the above noted facts and circumstances of the present case, wherefrom it is clear that it is the respondent who is solely responsible for the complete welfare of the children who are in his care and custody. Admittedly, out of these children, one daughter is suffering from low mental growth. On the other hand, the petitioner has been unable to show as to why she is unable to travel. Whereas, it is not in dispute that the respondent is working and he has the added responsibility of looking after the daily needs as well as provide all emotional and mental support to the children who are in his care and custody. Further, as per report of the Mediator dated 12.12.2022, mediation between the parties has been failed.

6.

Moreover, in other similar cases like this present one, the Hon'ble Supreme Court, as well as this Court have refused relief to the wife. One such case which may be referred to is: (2006) 9 SCC 197 'Anindita Das Vs. Srijit Das' wherein Hon'ble Supreme Court under similar circumstances dismissed the wife's application seeking transfer of petition filed by the husband. Reference in this regard may also be made to two cases of this Court where, in similar circumstances this Court had dismissed transfer applications filed on behalf of the wife. These are: TA no. 126 of 2018 Smt. Akhwinder Kaur Vs. Sh. Gurpreet Singh; and TA No. 299 of 2019 Nisha alias Manisha vs. Amarveer Yadav. 7.

Accordingly, in view of the facts as noted above, this petition stands dismissed. Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of. 06.01.2023 (Nidhi Gupta) ashok Judge Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No