Allowed

Richa v. Surender Kumar

Punjab & Haryana HC20 Aug 2013TA/123/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a transfer application under Section 24 CPC filed by a wife to shift her husband's divorce petition from Rohtak to Jhajjar. The court allowed the transfer, relying on precedent that convenience of the wife must be considered in matrimonial proceedings initiated by the husband.

What did the court decide?

The Section 13 marriage petition pending in Rohtak is ordered to be withdrawn and transferred to the District Court, Jhajjar for disposal.

Richa Vs Surender Kumar — Matrimonial and Divorce | Punjab & Haryana HC (2013)

¶1

Manoj Kumar #1# 2013.08.21 09:21I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh

¶2

TA 123/2013 (O&M)

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

TA 123/2013 (O&M) Date of decision: 20.8.2013

¶5

Smt. Richa

¶6

.............Petitioner

¶7

¶8

Surender Kumar

¶9

.............Respondent

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH

¶11

Present:Mr. Rakesh Nehra, Advocate along with the petitioner-wife in person.

¶12

Mr. Vivek Suri, Advocate along with the respondent in person.

¶13

Jaswant Singh,J(Oral).

¶14

Petitioner wife has filed the present transfer application under Section 24 CPC for the transfer of petition filed by respondent husband under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act,1955 (for short “the Act”) titled Surender Kumar Vs. Smt. Richa from the Court of learned Addl. District Judge, Rohtak to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Jhajjar.

¶15

It is stated that the marriage between the parties was solemnized on 29.4.2004 at Jhajjar and out of the said wedlock a male child was born. Due to matrimonial dispute, it is alleged that the petitioner alongwith minor child was turned out of the matrimonial home at Rohtak. Petitioner is stated to be residing separately along with minor son at her parental home at Jhajjar.

¶16

TA 123/2013 (O&M)

¶17

#2#

¶18

It is stated that the respondent husband filed a petition under Section 13 of the Act titled as Surender Kumar Vs. Smt. Richa, which is pending in the Court of learned Addl. District Judge, Rohtak.

¶19

It is averred that the petitioner wife alongwith her minor child is fully dependent upon her parents while the respondent is not paying even a single penny for the upkeep and maintenance of petitioner wife and minor child. It is further averred that there is no male member in her family to accompany her on each and every date of hearing and in these circumstances, it is difficult for the petitioner to attend the proceedings initiated by the respondent husband at Rohtak, which is about 50 kms away from Jhajjar.

¶20

After hearing learned counsel for the parties, I find that the grounds set out in the petition are sufficient to allow the petition as it is well settled that in matrimonial proceedings initiated by the husband against wife, convenience of wife must be looked at. Reliance in this regard can be placed upon Sumita Singh v. Kumar Sanjay and another , AIR 2002 SC 396.

¶21

In view of the above, the present petition is allowed, the petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act,1955 (for short “the Act”) titled Surender Kumar Vs. Smt. Richa from the Court of learned Addl. District Judge, Rohtak is ordered to be withdrawn and transferred to the District Courts, Jhajjar for disposal in accordance with law from the stage of withdrawal.

¶22

( JASWANT SINGH ) JUDGE

¶23

August 20, 2013 manoj

Richa v. Surender Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Richa v. Surender Kumar

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

Rama Nandan Vs Mehta Ram

Bhagwanti Devi and Ors. Vs Sarla Devi and Ors.

Bimal Mohan Joshi Vs Vijay Kumar Sharma

Mangal Singh Vs Darshan Singh & Anr.

Romi Vs Narinder Singh

Nirmala Vs Shri Ram