Baljit Kaur v. Parveen @ Penny Bhatia

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH 2023:PHHC:069377 TA No.1038 of 2022 (O&M) Date of decision: 12.05.2023 Baljit Kaur

...Petitioner

v Parveen @ Penny Bhatia

...Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Present:- Mr. Parampreet Singh Paul, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Krishan Kanha, Advocate for Mr. NS Lucky, 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.HMA/388/2022 filed by respondent-husband under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, titled "Parveen vs. Baljit Kaur" pending in the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court/District Judge, SBS Nagar, Nawanshahr, to a court of competent jurisdiction at Rupnagar.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, submits: i) that the parties solemnized marriage on 10.12.2020. ii) that no child was born out of the wedlock. iii) that the petitioner is living in her parental home at Rupnagar.

iv) that the distance between the place of residence and place of proceedings is 80 kms (one side).

v) that the petitioner is undergoing plasma treatment and anal dilatation therapy and has also undergone lateral internal sphincterotomy + Dilatation and Tag Removal Surgery at Govt. Hospital, Rupnagar on 23.08.2022 (Annexure P3).

vi) that the following cases are also pending between the parties at Rupnagar:- a. Petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C.

b. FIR No.71 dated 01.07.2022, registered under Sections 406, 498-A IPC at Police Station Nurpurbedi, District Rupnagar.

3.

Learned counsel for the respondent is unable to dispute the aforesaid facts.

4.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties. 5.

Besides the facts as noticed hereinabove especially the fact that the petitioner is undergoing treatment at Rupnagar, the legal position in such like cases as the present one is also very clear. Reference in this regard may be made in particular, to judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in case of N.C.V. Aishwarya vs A.S. Saravana Karthik Sha," 2022 Live Law (SC) 627, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held as under:- "9. The cardinal principle for exercise of power under section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure is that the ends of justice should demand the transfer of the suit, appeal or other proceeding.

In matrimonial matters, wherever Courts are called upon to consider the plea of transfer, the Courts have to take into consideration the economic soundness of both the parties, the social strata of the spouses and their behavioural pattern, their standard of life prior to the marriage and subsequent thereto and the circumstances of both the parties in eking out their livelihood and under whose protective umbrella they are seeking their sustenance to life. Given the prevailing socioeconomic paradigm in the Indian society, generally, it is the wife's convenience which must be looked at while considering transfer.

10. Further, when two or more proceedings are pending in different Courts between the same parties which raise common question of fact and law, and when the decisions in the cases are interdependent, it is desirable that they should be tried together by the same Judge so as to avoid multiplicity in trial of the same issues and conflict of decisions."

6. Further reliance can be placed upon the judgments in "Sumita Singh vs Kumar Sanjay", 2002 SC 396 and "Rajani Kishor Pardeshi

vs Kishor Babulal Pardeshi", 2005(12) SCC 237, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed that "while deciding the transfer application, the Courts are required to give more weightage and consideration to the convenience of the female litigants and transfer of legal proceedings from one Court to another should ordinarily be allowed, taking into consideration their convenience and the Courts should desist from putting female litigants under undue hardships."

7. Even this Court in number of cases has followed the aforesaid principle of law. Accordingly, it is well settled that while considering the transfer of a matrimonial dispute/case, at the instance of the wife, the Court is to consider the family condition of the wife, the custody of the minor child, economic condition of the wife, her physical health and earning capacity of the husband and most important the convenience of the wife i.e. she cannot travel alone without assistance of a male member of her family, connectivity of the place to and fro from her place of residence as well as bearing of the litigation charges and travelling expenses.

8.

After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and in view of the judgments i.e. Sumita Singh's case (supra), Rajani Kishor Pardeshi's case (supra) and N.C.V. Aishwarya's case (supra) passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, this Court deems it appropriate to allow the present petition, subject to the following conditions:- a) The petition bearing No.HMA/388/2022 filed by respondent-husband under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, titled "Parveen vs. Baljit Kaur" pending in the Court of Principal Judge, Family

Court/District Judge, SBS Nagar, Nawanshahr, is transferred to a court of competent jurisdiction at Rupnagar.

b) The ld. District Judge, SBS Nagar is directed to transfer complete record pertaining to the aforesaid case to District Judge, Rupnagar.

c) The parties, through their counsel, are directed to appear before the District & Sessions Judge, Rupnagar on 02.06.2023.

d) The District Judge, Rupnagar will assign the said petition to the Court of competent jurisdiction. 9.

The concerned Court at Rupnagar will make all endeavour to refer the case before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre for exploring the possibility of some amicable settlement between the parties. 10.

The Court concerned, where the litigation pending between the parties, will accommodate them with one date in one calendar month. Disposed of.

12.05.2023 (Nidhi Gupta) ashok Judge Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No