Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2009 DIGILAW 1284 (RAJ)

Parul Vyas v. Vikas Vyas

2009-05-11

VINEET KOTHARI

body2009
JUDGMENT 1. - This is a transfer application seeking transfer of petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act filed by respondent husband at Family Court, Jaipur. The petitioner wife has prayed for transfer of proceedings from Jaipur to Hanumangarh, where she is said to be living with her parents. 2. Learned counsel for the respondent-husband Mr. Vineet Jain pointed out that in the summons sent by the Family Court, Jaipur, the report of process server dated 8.1.2008 discloses that the petitioner wife Smt. Parul Vyas was residing with her brother at address 322 AB, Nirnian Nagar, Jaipur and her uncle gave this report and stated that notice may be sent to Jaipur at above address. When again a registered notice was sent at the aforesaid Jaipur address, the same was retuned with an endorsement of refusal dated 29.3.2008 (Annex.3). On the next effort, the process server has reported that notices were taken for service at the given address at Hanumangarh where the petitioner wife was not found and the peon of the house Ramesh Gurjar informed that she lives at Jaipur. He also gave address of her maternal grand father Mr. Mahesh Chandra, near Champawat ji ka Mandir, Johri Bazar, Jaipur, with whom she was reported to be living at Jaipur. 3. From the above, it appears that. petitioner-wife is residing at Jaipur more often that Hanumangarh or may be permanently but has sought transfer of petitioner under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act to Hanumangarh from Jaipur just to cause harassment to the respondent husband, who has filed petition under Section 13 of the Act for seeking divorce on the ground of cruelty. Though it is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner-wife that in such transfer matters the attitude of the Court may lean towards wife, particularly when she is residing separately with parents and children, but in the present case it appears that petitioner wife is residing constantly at Jaipur and she has not only avoided service of summons on Family Court, Jaipur but she has definitely more than one place of residence at Jaipur and can face trial of the petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act there.. 4. 4. In view of the facts and circumstances obtaining in the case the transfer petition filed by the petitioner-wife cannot be allowed and same is accordingly rejected and Family Court, Jaipur is requested to expedite the trial of the case.Application dismissed. *******