Allowed

Kiranpal Kaur v. Balwinder Singh

Punjab & Haryana HC19 Jan 2012TA/593/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana allowed the applicant wife's transfer application under Section 24 CPC. Quoting a Supreme Court precedent, the Court prioritized the wife's convenience and safety, ordering the pending matrimonial petition filed by the husband to be transferred from District Judge Patiala to Sangrur.

What did the court decide?

The petition under Section 13(1)(iii) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 titled 'Balwinder Singh Vs. Kiranpal Kaur' transferred from District Judge Patiala to competent jurisdiction at Sangrur.

Kiranpal Kaur Vs Balwinder Singh — Matrimonial and Divorce | Punjab & Haryana HC (2012)

¶1

TA No.593 of 2011

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

TA No.593 of 2011

¶5

Date of decision : 19.01.2012

Kiranpal Kaur

...Applicant

Versus

Balwinder Singh

...Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN

¶12

Present: Mr. G.S. Nahel, Advocate, for the applicant.

¶13

Mr. Praveen Gupta, Advocate, for Mr. Sanjeev Trikha, Advocate, for the respondent.

¶14

JITENDRA CHAUHAN, J. (Oral)

¶15

The present application has been preferred by the applicantwife, under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, praying for the transfer of the petition titled as ‘Balwinder Singh Vs. Kiranpal Kaur’, filed by the respondent under Section 13(1)(iii) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short `the Act') from the Court of learned District Judge, Patiala, to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Sangrur.

¶16

Learned counsel for the applicant contends that after having been ousted from the matrimonial home, the applicant is residing at her parental home at Sangrur. The sole purpose of filing the petition under Section 13(1)(iii) of the Act is to harass the applicant. She also apprehends threat to her life and liberty at the hands the respondent-

TA No.593 of 2011

husband.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent has vehemently opposed the prayer.

¶21

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

¶22

Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Neelam Kanwar vs Devinder Singh Kanwar, 2001(1) M.L.J. 509 (SC), has observed as under:-

¶23

“…we are mindful of the fact that the petitioner is a lady and first respondent is a male, and, therefore, conveniencewise, a transfer to the place where the lady is residing, would be preferred by this Court unless it is shown that there are special reasons not to do so. No such special reason is shown.”

¶24

The applicant-wife is residing at Sangrur. The respondenthusband has filed a petition under Section 13(1)(iii) of the Act, which is pending before learned District Judge, Patiala. In the circumstances, it would certainly be difficult for the wife, living at the mercy of her parents, having no source of income, to attend the court proceedings at Patiala.

¶25

Considering the fact that the applicant is a resident of Sangrur and in the petitions filed by the husband, primarily, the convenience of the wife is to be seen, therefore, in my opinion, the balance of convenience is in favour of the applicant-wife and against

TA No.593 of 2011

the respondent.

In view of the above, the instant transfer application is allowed and the petition under Section 13(1)(iii) of the Act titled as ‘Balwinder Singh Vs. Kiranpal Kaur’ is withdrawn from the Court of learned District Judge, Patiala, and is transferred to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Sangrur. The entire record pertaining to the petition under Section 13(1)(iii) of the Act shall be sent by the trial Court at Patiala to the learned District Judge, Sangrur, within three weeks, who will either himself dispose it of or entrust it to any other Court of competent jurisdiction at Sangrur.

¶30

The parties shall appear before the learned District Judge, Sangrur, on 25.02.2012 at 10.00 a.m.

¶31

19.01.2012 atulsethi

¶32

(JITENDRA CHAUHAN) JUDGE

¶33

Note : Whether to be referred to Reporter ? Yes / No

Kiranpal Kaur v. Balwinder Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kiranpal Kaur v. Balwinder Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Iffco Tokio General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Krishna Devi and Ors.

Subhash Chand Vs Shiv Kumar and Ors.

Surinder Kaur and Ors. Vs Shiv Kumar and Ors.

Icici Lombard General Insurance Co. Vs Usha Rani and Ors.

Amita Kumari Vs Balwinder Kumar

Smt. Usha Rani and Others Vs State of Haryana and Others