Deeksha Sethi v. Anurag Khanna
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH Sr. No.111 Date of Decision: 25.02.2026 DEEKSHA SETHI ....Applicant
Versus
ANURAG KHANNA .....Respondent
CORAM:
HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ARCHANA PURI Present:- Mr. Sukhdeep Singh, Advocate for the applicant.
Mr. Neeraj Shandilya, Advocate for the respondent.
***** ARCHANA PURI, J. (Oral) The applicant-wife has filed the present application for seeking transfer of the petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act i.e. HMA/364/2025, titled 'Anurag Khanna Vs. Deeksha Sethi', filed by the respondent-husband, pending in the Family Court, Yamuna Nagar at Jagadhri and she seeks transfer of the same to the Court of competent jurisdiction at SAS Nagar.
In pursuance of notice issued, the respondent made appearance through counsel and filed reply.
Counsel for the parties heard.
At the very outset, it is submitted by the counsel for the applicant that matrimonial dispute had arisen between the parties to the lis, as a result whereof, they are residing separate. The applicant is working at Bangalore and she is doing 'work from home'. In the given circumstances, it is submitted that it is difficult for the applicant, to commute a distance of about 2300 kms., to defend the divorce petition, which is pending at Yamuna Nagar. Also, it is submitted that the parents of the applicant are residing at Zirakpur and as such, it will be convenient for her to pursue the litigation from Zirakpur.
Besides the aforesaid, counsel for the applicant has also submitted that the family of the respondent is quite large, on which account, it is not safe for the applicant, to pursue the litigation pending at Yamuna Nagar.
On the other hand, counsel for the respondent submits that the applicant has not come to the Court with clean hands. Further, it is submitted that the applicant has mentioned about her present address to be that of Bangalore, Karnataka and therefore, considering the same, it cannot be said that pursuing the litigation from Zirakpur shall be very convenient for her.
In view of the submissions aforesaid, it is pertinent to mention that while considering the transfer application relating to the matrimonial dispute, several factors ought to be taken into consideration. Though, the Courts generally lean towards convenience of the wife, while considering such applications, but however, the same is not a thumb rule. Various other
circumstances, spelt out from the material brought on record, ought to be taken into consideration.
In the case in hand, it is pertinent to mention that even though, in the memo of parties, the present address of the applicant, has been mentioned as that of Bangalore, Karnataka, but however, while making submissions, counsel for the applicant has submitted that the applicant proceeds to Bangalore, only after a gap of about 2-3 months, as she is working from home. However, this assertion has not been made in the application. In fact, from the address given in the memo of parties, it is evident that the applicant is not residing at Zirakpur, but however, she is residing at Bangalore, Karnataka.
Such, being the factual position, as spelt out from the material brought on record, it cannot be concluded that pursuing the litigation at SAS Nagar, would be more convenient for the applicant, as she is otherwise also, staying far away from Punjab/Haryana. Besides the aforesaid, it is pertinent to mention that even though, counsel for the applicant has made a submission, with regard to safety of the applicant not being there, if she pursues the litigation at Yamuna Nagar, as family of the respondent is large one, but however, this is a very vague assertion. Also, this assertion nowhere finds mention in the application.
On query by this Court, as to in what manner, the applicant is not safe, while pursuing the litigation at Yamuna Nagar, the counsel has simply stated about the family of the respondent to be large, which in itself
is not a factor, on which account, it can be concluded about there to be threat persisting to the applicant, at the behest of the respondent or his family. Considering the aforesaid vague allegations made and also keeping in view the fact of the applicant herself residing at Bangalore, Karnataka and also considering the averment about the applicant to be working from home and her conduct in not mentioning the same in the application, no case is made out for transfer of the divorce petition. Hence, the transfer application is hereby dismissed. (ARCHANA PURI) 25.02.2026 JUDGE Himanshu Vats Whether speaking/reasoned :
Yes Whether reportable :
Yes/No