Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2011 DIGILAW 697 (PNJ)

Kulwinder Kaur v. Sukhdarshan Singh

2011-03-03

JITENDRA CHAUHAN

body2011
JUDGMENT Jitendra Chauhan, J. (Oral) :- The present application has been filed under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, for transfer of petition titled as ‘Sukhdarshan Singh Vs. Kulwinder Kaur’, filed by the respondent under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short `the Act’), from the Court of learned Civil Judge, Shri Muktsar Sahib, to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Jalalabad West, District Ferozepur. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant contends that a complaint under Section 406/498-A, IPC and a petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C., claiming maintenance, are pending adjudication before the Court of learned JMIC, Jalalabad (West). 3. Learned counsel for the applicant further contends that the applicant is a resident of Jalalabad (West), and the respondent has filed the petition under Section 9 of the Act with a view to harass the applicant. She is raising her minor daughter born out of the wedlock between the parties. She also apprehends threat at the hands of the respondent-husband. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent has vehemently opposed the prayer. 5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. 6. From the perusal of the record, it emerges that the child born out of the wedlock of the parties is residing with the applicant. Two petitions filed by the applicant are prior in time. Otherwise also, the convenience of the wife is to be seen. It would certainly be difficult for the wife, living at the mercy of her parents, having no source of income and saddled with the responsibility of raising her minor daughter, to attend the court proceedings at Shri Muktsar Sahib. 7. Hon’ble the Supreme Court in Neelam Kanwar vs Devinder Singh Kanwar, 2001(1) M.L.J. 509 (SC), has observed as under:- “We are mindful of the fact that the petitioner is a lady and first respondent is a male, and, therefore, (for) convenience of wife, a transfer to the place where the lady is residing, would be preferred by this Court unless, it is shown that there are special reason not to do so. No special reason is shown.” 8. Considering the fact that the applicant is a resident of Jalalabad (West), and primarily, the convenience of the wife is to be seen, therefore, the balance of convenience is in favour of the applicant-wife and against the respondent. Accordingly, the petition filed by the respondent titled as ‘Sukhdarshan Singh Vs. No special reason is shown.” 8. Considering the fact that the applicant is a resident of Jalalabad (West), and primarily, the convenience of the wife is to be seen, therefore, the balance of convenience is in favour of the applicant-wife and against the respondent. Accordingly, the petition filed by the respondent titled as ‘Sukhdarshan Singh Vs. Kulwinder Kaur’ under Section 9 of the Act, pending in the Court of learned Civil Judge, (Hindu Marriage Act), Shri Muktsar Sahib, deserves to be transferred to Jalalabad (West), District Ferozepur. 9. In view of the above, the instant transfer application is allowed and the petition under Section 9 of the Act titled as ‘Sukhdarshan Singh Vs. Kulwinder Kaur’ is withdrawn from the Court of learned Civil Judge, (Hindu Marriage Act), Shri Muktsar Sahib, and is transferred to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Jalalabad (West), District Ferozepur. The entire record pertaining to the petition under Section 9 of the Act shall be sent by the trial Court at Shri Muktsar Sahib to the learned District Judge, Ferozepur, within three weeks, who will either himself dispose it of or entrust it to any other Court of competent jurisdiction. 10. The parties shall appear before the Court of learned District Judge, Ferozepur, on 31.03.2011. ---------0.B.S.0------------