Allowed

Meera v. Baljit Singh

Punjab & Haryana HC22 Oct 2013TA/309/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Punjab and Haryana allowed a transfer application under Section 24 CPC to move matrimonial proceedings from Yamuna Nagar to Panipat, citing the petitioner wife's convenience and lack of income.

What did the court decide?

The petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 filed by the respondent was ordered to be withdrawn and transferred to the District Courts, Panipat.

Meera Vs Baljit Singh — Matrimonial and Divorce | Punjab & Haryana HC (2013)

¶1

Manoj Kumar 2013.10.24 09:28 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh

¶2

TA 309/2013 (O&M)

¶3

#1#

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶5

TA 309/2013 (O&M) Date of decision: 22.10.2013

¶6

Meera

¶7

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

¶8

¶9

Baljit Singh

¶10

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

¶11

CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH

¶12

Present:Mr. Sukhdeep Parmar,Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Deepak Gupta, Advocate for the respondent.

¶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 Baljit Singh Vs. Smt. Meera from the Court of learned District Judge, Yamuna Nagar to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Panipat.

¶15

It is stated that the marriage between the parties was solemnized on 25.1.2006 at Panipat 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 Yamuna Nagar. It is further stated that the petitioner along with minor son is separately residing at her parental home at Panipat.

¶16

The respondent husband filed a petition under Section 13 of the Act titled as Baljit Singh Vs. Smt. Meera which, as noticed above,

¶17

#2#

¶18

TA 309/2013 (O&M)

¶19

is pending in the Court of learned District Judge, Yamuna Nagar.

¶20

It is averred that the petitioner wife is a house wife, has no source of income and she 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 stated that there is no other male member except her father, who is 70 years of age and suffering ailments and in these circumstances, it is difficult for the petitioner to attend the proceedings initiated by the respondent husband at Yamuna Nagar, which is about 125 kms away from Panipat.

¶21

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.

¶22

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 Baljit Singh Vs. Smt. Meera from the Court of learned District Judge, Yamuna Nagar is ordered to be withdrawn and transferred to the District Courts, Panipat for disposal in accordance with law from the stage of withdrawal.

¶23

October 22, 2013 manoj

¶24

( JASWANT SINGH ) JUDGE

Meera v. Baljit Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Meera v. Baljit 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

Madhu Jain and Anr. Vs Divya Behal and Ors.

Jagtar Singh Vs Charan Singh and Ors.

Jasjit Kaur Vs Ranjit Singh

Sukka Vs Neeraj Gupta

Kamaljit Vs Ramesh Kumar & Anr.

Deepak Kumar Vs Modh Yasin and Other