Allowed

Simran Suri v. Harmeet Singh

Delhi HC6 Oct 2025TR.P.(C.)/183/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner wife sought transfer of an ongoing Hindusrol Marriage Act divorce case from one family court judge to another. Counsel argued mutual proceedings in different courts were not maintainable. The petition was allowed with liberty to withdraw. Headnote: In this matrimonial matter, the petitioner wife approached the Delhi High Court seeking the transfer of a pending Section 13(1)(ia) Hindu Ma

What the court decided

AI extract

Simran Suri Vs Harmeet Singh — Matrimonial and Divorce | Delhi HC (2025)

¶1

$~62

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

TR.P.(C.) 183/2025 & CM APPL. 62272/2025-Exemption

¶4

SIMRAN SURI .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Vinod Dahiya, Mr. Dhruv Khurana, Ms. Shreya Garg, Ms. Khushi Dahiya, Ms. Vandna Dahiya and Mr. Bhaskar Dongwal, Advocates.

¶5

versus

¶6

HARMEET SINGH .....Respondent Through: None.

¶7

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SAURABH BANERJEE

¶8

O R D E R

¶9

% 06.10.2025

¶10

By virtue of the present petition, petitioner/ wife seeks transfer of the case bearing No. HMA 1635/2024 filed under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 [ HMAct ] by the respondent/ husband, from the learned Family Court, North West Rohini Delhi to learned Judge, Family Court, West Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi.

¶11

In essence it is the case of learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has filed a petition under Section 13(1)(ia) of the HMAct, 1955 being HMA No.209/2025 before learned Family Court-02, West, Tis Hazari against the respondent, who in turn has also filed a similar petition under Section 13(1)(ia) of the HMAct, 1955 being HMA No.1635/2024, albeit , before the Ld. Family Court, North West Rohini, Delhi.

¶12

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 09/10/2025 at 14:34:18

¶13

After some arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since both the aforesaid petitions inter se the very same parties, under the same provision of law, in different courts are per se not maintainable, he seeks to withdraw the present petition with liberty to take appropriate steps for initiating action(s) qua it in accordance with law.

¶14

Heard.

¶15

Allowed, with liberty as prayed for.

¶16

SAURABH BANERJEE, J.

¶17

OCTOBER 06, 2025 NA

¶18

Simran Suri v. Harmeet Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Simran Suri v. Harmeet Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Amit Vs Muskan Alias Gudiya

Neeti Sharma & Anr. Vs Kailash Chand Gupta & Ors.

Rajan Kapur Vs Ocm Private Limited

Software Technology Parks of India Vs L.I. Technologies Pvt. Ltd.

Pardeep Kumar Thakur Vs Ashok Kumar Arora

Poonam Gola Vs Gaurav Arora & Ors.

Sabherwal Service Station Vs Rc Tours and Travels & Anr.

Udit Bansal Vs Manju Bansal & Ors.

Sanjay & Anr. Vs Mohd Yunus

Krishan Kumar Batra Vs Mahesh Tulsiani, Director Tulsiani Construction & Developers Ltd.

Madan Lal Vs Mohd Yunus

Joginder Kumar Vs Union of India & Anr.

Ravinder Vs Union of India & Anr.