Allowed

Amita @ Rachna Sharma v. Sudhir Kumar

Punjab & Haryana HC3 Dec 2013TA/342/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Punjab & Haryana allowed a transfer application filed under Section 24 CPC. The court ordered the transfer of a Section 9 restitution petition from Panipat to Jagadhari, citing the wife's dependence on her parents and the distance, relying on Sumita Singh v. Kumar Sanjay.

What did the court decide?

Order to withdraw and transfer the Section 9 petition from Panipat to the District Court at Jagadhari for disposal.

Amita @ Rachna Sharma Vs Sudhir Kumar — Matrimonial and Divorce | Punjab & Haryana HC (2013)

¶1

Manoj Kumar #1# 2013.12.12 10:25I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh

¶2

TA 342/2013 (O&M)

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

TA 342/2013 (O&M) Date of decision: 3.12.2013

¶5

Amita

¶6

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

¶7

¶8

Sudhir Kumar Sudhakar

¶9

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

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH

¶11

Present:Mr. Nonish Kumar, Advocate for the petitioner. None for the respondent despite service.

¶12

Jaswant Singh,J(Oral).

¶13

Petitioner wife has filed the present transfer application under Section 24 CPC for the transfer of petition filed by respondent husband under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act,1955 (for short “the Act”) for restitution of Conjugal Right, titled Sudhir Kumar Sudhakar Vs. Amita @ Rachna Sharma from the Court of learned Addl. District Judge, Panipat to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Jagadhari, District Yamuna Nagar.

¶14

It is stated that the marriage between the parties was solemnized on 13.10.1996 at Jagadhari, District Yamuna Nagar. No child was born out of the said wedlock. Due to dowry demand, it is alleged that the petitioner was turned out of the matrimonial home at Panipat. Petitioner is stated to be now residing separately at her parental home at Jagadhari, where she has already filed a petition under Section 13 of the Act.

¶15

#2#

¶16

TA 342/2013 (O&M)

¶17

Thereafter, as a counterblast and in order to harass the petitioner-wife, respondent husband filed a petition under Section 9 of the Act, which, as noticed above, is pending in the Court of learned Addl. District Judge, Panipat.

¶18

It is averred that the petitioner wife 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 in these circumstances, it is difficult for the petitioner to attend the proceedings initiated by the respondent husband at Panipat, which is about 100 kms away from Jagadhari.

¶19

None has appeared on behalf of the respondent-husband to controvert the aforesaid facts.

¶20

After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner and taking into account the facts and circumstances of the present case, 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 9 of the Act, titled Sudhir Kumar Sudhakar Vs. Amita @ Rachna Sharma from the Court of learned Addl. District Judge, Panipat is ordered to be withdrawn and transferred to the District Courts, Jagadhari for disposal in accordance with law from the stage of withdrawal.

¶22

( JASWANT SINGH ) JUDGE

¶23

December 03, 2013 manoj

Amita @ Rachna Sharma v. Sudhir Kumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amita @ Rachna Sharma v. Sudhir 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

Aditya Industries and Ors. Vs Suraj Bhan etc.

Pritpal Singh and Anr. Vs Surinder Kumar Aggarwal and Anr.

Tarsem Singh Vs Ravinder Singh

Pooja Vs Devender Singh

Raju Sarin Vs Subhash Chander Madhok

Harbinder Kaur & Ors. Vs Harjinder Singh