Monika v. Mandeep Singh

-1IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH TA-1039-2021 (O&M) Date of decision: 28.09.2022 Monika ....Petitioner Vs.

Mandeep Singh ....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN

Present:

Mr. Rahul Makkar, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. G.S. Nahel, Advocate for the respondent.

******* ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN, J. (Oral) Prayer in this petition is for transfer of the petition filed by the respondent-husband under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, pending before the Family Court, Patiala to the competent Court of jurisdiction at Rohtak.

While issuing notice of motion, following order was passed by this Court on 28.10.2021: - "...The marriage of the petitioner with the respondent was solemnized on 21.10.2015 at Rohtak. It is case the petitioner that ever since the marriage of the petitioner, she has been

-2harassed, humiliated and even tortured by the respondent and his family members. She has been deserted since 21.12.2015. Number of times Panchayat was convened, The respondent agreed to take the petitioner back, however, such commitments were never honored.

The petitioner got registered FIR No. 342 dated 08.11.2017, under Section 498-A, 406, 506 IPC, at Women Police Station Rohtak against the respondent(husband) and other family members. She has also filed a complaint under Section 12 of the Protection of Women From Domestic Violence Act, 2005, which is pending at Rohtak. A petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. for maintenance and litigation expenses is also pending before Principal Judge, Family Court Rohtak. It is stated that in order to harass the petitioner, the respondent-husband has filed the petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, which is pending before the District Judge Patiala. It is difficult for the petitioner to travel from Rohtak to Patiala to attend the Court proceedings as the distance is more than 230 kms. The petitioner has no independent source of income, she is fully dependent on her parents..."

Learned counsel has relied upon the judgments Sumita Singh Vs. Kumar Sanjay, 2002 SC 396 and Rajani Kishor Pardeshi Vs. Kishor

-3Babulal Pardeshi, 2005(12) SCC 237, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court 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."

Learned counsel has further relied upon N.C.V. Aishwarya Vs. A.S. Saravana Karthik Sha, 2022 Live Law (SC) 627, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court held as under: - "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.

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

-4are 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." Learned counsel for the respondent has, however, opposed the prayer for transfer of petition filed by the respondent-husband. 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 family condition of the wife, custody of the minor child, economic condition of the wife, her physical health and earning capacity of the husband and most important, 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.

After hearing the counsel for the parties, considering the fact that the petitioner-wife will have to bear the litigation expenses and transportation expenses and in view of the judgments in 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 deem it appropriate to allow the present petition, subject to the following conditions:-

1. The petition filed under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, pending before the Family Court, Patiala will be transferred to the competent Court of jurisdiction at Rohtak.

2. The District Judge, Rohtak will assign the said petition to the competent Court of jurisdiction.

-53. The Family Court, Patiala is directed to transfer all the record pertaining to the aforesaid case to District Judge, Rohtak.

4. The parties are directed to appear before the Family Court, Rohtak within a period of 01 month from today.

5. The Family Court, Rohtak will make all the endeavour to refer the case before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre for exploring the possibility of amicable settlement between the parties.

6. The Court concerned, where the litigations between the parties are pending, will accommodate them with one date in one calender month.

Present petition is disposed of accordingly.

[ ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN ] JUDGE 28.09.2022 vishnu Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No