T.A.No.655 of 2012 (O&M) #1# IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH T.A.No.655 of 2012 (O&M) Date of Decision:
21. 5.2013 Harinderjit Kaur .....Petitioner(s) Versus Karamjit Singh ....Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH Present: Mr.Atul Jain, Advocate for the petitioner.
Ms.Anita Sharma, Advocate for MRS.Baljit Kaur Bhullar, Advocate for the respondent.
JASWANT SINGH, J (ORAL) Petitioner wife has filed the present transfer application under Section 24 CPC for the transfer of petition filed by respondent husband under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act,1955 (for short “the Act”.) for restitution of Conjugal Right, titled Karamjit Singh versus Harinderjit Kaur from the Court of learned Civil Judge (Sr.Division).Hoshiarpur to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Kapurthala.
It is stated that the marriage between the parties was solemnized on 5.10.2008 at Kapurthala and out of the said wedlock a male child was born on 24.1.2010.
Due to dowry demand, it is alleged that the petitioner alongwith minot child was turned out of the matrimonial home at Hoshiarpur.
Petitioner along with minot child is stated to be residing separately at her parental home at Kapurthala, where she is employed in a School in the Ministerial Staff.
It is stated that the petitioner has filed a complaint under Section 12 of the Protection of Woman from Domestic Violence Act, which is pending in T.A.No.655 of 2012 (O&M) #2# the Court at Kapurthala.
It is further stated that in order to harass the petitioner-wife, the respondent husband filed a petition under Section 9 of the Act which, as noticed above, is pending in the Court of learned Civil Judge (Sr.Division).Hoshiarpur.
It is averred that the petitioner wife alongwith her minot child is at the mercy of her parents while the respondent is not paying even a single penny for the upkeep and maintenance of petitioner wife and minot child and in these circumstances, it is difficult for the petitioner to attend the proceedings initiated by the respondent husband at Hoshiarpur, which is about 90 kms away from Kapurthala.
After hearing learned counsel for the parties and taking into account the fact that one case is already pending at Kapurthala, 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 Act titled Karamjit Singh versus Harinderjit Kaur from the Court of learned Civil Judge (Sr.Division).Hoshiarpur is ordered to be withdrawn and transferred to the District Courts, Kapurthala for disposal in accordance with law from the stage of withdrawal.
May 21, 2013 ( JASWANT SINGH ) manot JUDGE