TA No.577 of 2012(O&M) #1# IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.
TA No.577 of 2012(O&M) Date of Decision:-01.03.2013 Sunita Rani......Petitioner.
Versus Prem Kumar......Respondent.
CORAM:- HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH Present:- Mr.Deepak Aggarwal, Advocate for Petitioner-wife.
None for the respondent-husband.
*** JASWANT SINGH, J.(ORAL) Petitioner wife has filed the present transfer application under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure for the transfer of petition under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage, 1955 filed by respondent husband for restitution of conjugal rights titled as “Prem Kumar versus Sunita Rani”.
from the Court of Learned District Judge, SiRs.to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Bathinda.
It is averred that the marriage between the parties was solemnized on 20.02.2011 according to Hindu Rites & Ceremonies at Bathinda.
It is further stated that out of this wedlock no child was born.
It is further stated that due to matrimonial dispute and harassment for dowry, the petitioner wife was thrown out of her matrimonial house in August 2012 and since then she is residing separately at her parental house at Bathinda.
It is averred that the petitioner wife is a house wife and is TA No.577 of 2012(O&M) #2# having no source of income.
It is further averred that that petitioner- wife has initiated proceedings under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 at Bathinda wherein the respondent- husband is already appearing.
It is further stated that in order to save his skin, the respondent-husband has filed a petition under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act for restitution of conjugal rites before the Court at Sirsa.
It is further stated that it is difficult for petitioner-wife to travel 200 Kms to attend the proceedings initiated by the respondent husband at Sirsa.
As per office report respondent-husband is duly served but none has caused appearance on his behalf.
However, I find that the grounds set out in the petition are sufficient to allow the petition as it is well settled that in matrimonial proceedings initiated by the husband against wife, convenience of wife must be looked at.
Reliance in this regard can be placed upon Sumita Singh v.
Kumar Sanjay and another, AIR 200.SC 396.
In view of the above, the present petition is allowed, the petition under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 titled as “Prem Kumar versus Sunita Rani”.
pending in the Court of learned District Judge, SiRs.is ordered to be withdrawn and transferred to courts of competent jurisdiction at Bathinda for disposal in accordance with law from the stage of withdrawal.
( JASWANT SINGH ) JUDGE March 01, 2013 Vinay