Amandeep Kaur v. Satwinder Singh

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH 205+247 (i) TA-1194-2024 (O&M) Amandeep Kaur ...Applicant

VERSUS

Satwinder Singh and others

...Respondents

(ii) TA-1195-2024 (O&M) Amandeep Kaur ...Applicant

VERSUS

Karanveer Singh Saini

...Respondent

Date of Decision: August 04, 2025

CORAM:

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ARCHANA PURI

Present:

Mr.Sandeep Singh Deol, Advocate for the applicant.

Mr.Manpreet Singh Dua, Advocate for the respondent(s).

**** ARCHANA PURI, J.

Applicant-Amandeep Kaur has filed the TA-1194-2024 seeking transfer of the civil suit, filed by respondent No.1-father-in-law bearing No.CS-2011-2024, titled 'Satwinder Singh vs. Amandeep Kaur', pending before learned trial Court, Patiala, as well as TA-1195-2024, for seeking

-2transfer of the petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, filed by respondent-husband bearing No.DMC-831-2024 titled 'Karanveer Singh Saini vs. Amandeep Kaur', pending in the Family Court, Patiala and she seeks transfer of both the aforesaid cases to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Jalandhar.

Upon notice issued, the respondent made appearance through counsel and filed the replies in the respective transfer applications. Learned counsel for the parties heard.

At the very outset, it is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that marriage between applicant-Amandeep Kaur and respondentKaranveer Singh Saini, had taken place on 30.10.2022 and one girl child born from the said wedlock, who is 11⁄2 years old, is in the care and custody of the applicant. However, on account of matrimonial dispute, the applicantwife and respondent-husband are residing separate. The respondenthusband has petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, which is pending before Family Court, Patiala. Even, Satwinder Singh, father-in-law of applicant has filed a civil suit to restrain the applicant from entering the matrimonial home, which is also pending in the Courts at Patiala. Also, it is submitted that the applicant has no source of income and is dependent upon her parental family. The minor child, born from the aforesaid wedlock, is also in the care and custody of the applicant. In the given circumstances, it is difficult to commute a distance of about 155 kms. to defend the aforesaid litigation.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents, while

-3making reference to the respective replies submits that the applicant has not come to the Court with clean hands. In fact, she is working as a teacher in CBSE School. He has made to reference to Annexure R-7, which depicts about the script of the message sent by the applicant to respondent-husband, wherein, it is stated that she has got job as a teacher in CBSE School. Also, further it is submitted that the applicant is an educated lady, who can take care of the litigation. Moreover, the litigation is of civil nature, which does not require presence of the parties, on each and every date of hearing. On query by the Court, it is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant is not working. In fact, she was offered a job, as she applied earlier, but however, she has not joined the job as teacher.

In view of the submissions aforesaid and also taking into consideration the material brought on record, it is pertinent to mention that even though, the Courts generally give weightage to the convenience of the wife, in case of matrimonial dispute, but however, it is not a thumb rule. Various other circumstances, spelt out, are to be taken into consideration. Though, it is submitted that the applicant is employed as a teacher, except for the said message script, which is Annexure R-7, there is no material coming on record, about any such job, having joined by the applicant. In fact, the message Annexure R-7, depicts the group photograph, probably of teachers and on query by the Court, learned counsel for the respondent, was unable to pin-point, as to whether, there is picture of the applicant also, in the said group photograph.

-4the submission made by learned counsel for the applicant the employment of the applicant as teacher, as such is not evident. Considering the aforesaid fact and also taking into consideration, the fact that the minor girl child, born from the wedlock, is in the care and custody of the applicant and also taking into consideration the distance between the two places, both the transfer applications, as such, are hereby allowed. The civil suit, filed by respondent No.1-father-in-law bearing No.CS-2011-2024, titled 'Satwinder Singh vs. Amandeep Kaur', pending before learned trial Court, Patiala, as well as petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, filed by respondent-husband bearing No.DMC-831-2024 titled 'Karanveer Singh Saini vs.

Amandeep Kaur', pending in the Family Court, Patiala, stand transferred to the Courts of competent jurisdiction at District Jalandhar. The requisite record of the aforesaid cases be sent by the trial Court and Family Court, Patiala, respectively, to the District and Sessions Judge, Jalandhar. Learned District and Sessions Judge, Jalandhar shall assign both the said petitions to the trial Court and Family Court, Jalandhar, respectively. Even, the parties are directed to appear before the trial Court and Family Court, Jalandhar, within a period of one month from today onwards.

August 04, 2025 (ARCHANA PURI) Vgulati JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable Yes/No