JUDGMENT Mr. K. Kannan, J.: (Oral) - CM Nos.25926-27-CII of 2012. Applications are allowed, as prayed for. Annexures A1 to A3 are taken on record. Transfer Application No.199 of 2012 1. The petition for transfer of matrimonial proceedings initiated by the husband is sought by the wife on the ground that there are already three cases which are pending at the Courts at Karnal: (i) a complaint registered for offences under Section 498-A and other related offences; (ii) petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. for maintenance; and (iii) proceedings for offences under Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. 2. Reply had been filed by the husband contesting the petitioner’s plea and stating however that having regard to the fact that the wife is contending that the proceedings are pending at Faridabad which is more than about 150 kilometers, he would have no objection if the case were to be transferred to a place which is midway that could be convenient to both parties, namely, in the Court at Sonepat. During the proceedings, the respondent complained that there has been an incident of assault and injury on him at the instance of the petitioner when two of her brothers accosted him after the Court proceedings at Karnal and attacked him with sharp-edged weapon and it is also stated that they threatened to kill him. The respondent would file a MLR setting out the details of injuries that were said to be abrasions and contusions over the forearm, elbow and the posterior aspect of the right leg respectively. The counsel for the respondent would point out to an alleged report in the press of the incident. 3. The counsel for the petitioner states that the case at Karnal has been pending for nearly two years and there has been no one single incident of any assault or attempt on the respondent’s life all along and the incident now complained of is a make-believe affair intending to influence the mind of the Court to thwart the attempt for a transfer in the manner sought by the wife. 4. In a situation where a party denies the incident of assault, it will be not possible for me to merely rely on a press report to vouch for the truth of incident. Again, I find the complaint of the respondent is that he was attacked by a sharp weapon. 4. In a situation where a party denies the incident of assault, it will be not possible for me to merely rely on a press report to vouch for the truth of incident. Again, I find the complaint of the respondent is that he was attacked by a sharp weapon. There is no cut or punctured wound in the MLR. Contusions or abrasions do not fit with the weapon alleged to have been used. This is merely a prima facie observation and this is not intended to impede any investigation or any legal action that could be pursued by parties. I am at least convinced that this is good enough reason for refuse the plea of transfer of proceedings. I am not also impressed about a plea that the case would be directed to be taken up by a Court at Sonepat merely because that it is midway Faridabad and Karnal. All the cases at Karnal which are pending nearly 2 years would themselves be a justification for transfer of the matrimonial proceedings initiated by the husband to Karnal for disposal in accordance with law. 5. The petition for transfer is ordered and the case pending before the Court at Faridabad is ordered to be withdrawn and transferred to the District Court at Karnal, for disposal in accordance with law. 6. Parties are at liberty to seek for appropriate and convenient dates to coincide with the dates of pendency of other three cases which are pending between the same parties. 7. With these observations, the transfer application is allowed. 8. Parties shall appear before the District Court at Karnal on 05.11.2012.