Allowed

Aarti Gupta v. Manik Goyal

Punjab & Haryana HC13 Aug 2013TA/36/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This transfer application sought the relocation of a restitution of conjugal rights petition from Malerkotla to Panchkula. Given the respondent's lack of objection and the location of the petitioner, the transfer petition was allowed, and the original suit was ordered withdrawn and transferred.

What did the court decide?

Transfer of the restitution of conjugal rights petition from the Court of Addl. Civil Judge, Malerkotla to the District Courts, Panchkula.

Aarti Gupta Vs Manik Goyal — Matrimonial and Divorce | Punjab & Haryana HC (2013)

¶1

Manoj Kumar #1# 2013.08.21 09:22I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh

¶2

TA 36/2013 (O&M)

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

TA 36/2013 (O&M) Date of decision: 13.8.2013

¶5

Aarti Gupta

¶6

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

¶7

¶8

Manik Goyal

¶9

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

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH

¶11

Present:Mr. Anuj Balyan, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Naveen Batra, Advocate for the respondent.

¶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 Manik Goyal Vs. Aarti Gupta from the Court of learned Addl. Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Malerkotla to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Panchkula.

¶14

It is stated that the marriage between the parties was solemnized on 3.2.2008 at Malerkotla and the parties cohabited as husband and wife in the matrimonial home at Malerkotla. Out of the said wedlock a female child was born on 13.12.2008. Due to matrimonial dispute, the wife is stated to be residing separately along with minor daughter at her parental home at Panchkula since June 2012 where she is stated to have filed three cases namely (i) FIR under Sections 406/498-A/506 IPC (ii) petition for maintenance under

¶15

TA 36/2013 (O&M) #2#

¶16

Section 125 Cr.P.C and (iii) complaint under Section 12 of the Domestic Violence Act.

¶17

Upon notice, respondent-husband has put in appearance through his counsel, who states at bar that his client has no objection, if the present petition for restitution of conjugal rights is ordered to be transferred to Panchkula.

¶18

In view of the aforesaid agreed stand, the present petition is allowed, the petition under Section 9 of the Act titled Manik Goyal Vs. Aarti Gupta from the Court of learned Addl. Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Malerkotla is ordered to be withdrawn and transferred to the District Courts, Panchkula for disposal in accordance with law from the stage of withdrawal.

¶19

August 13, 2013 manoj

¶20

( JASWANT SINGH ) JUDGE

Aarti Gupta v. Manik Goyal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aarti Gupta v. Manik Goyal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Banarsi Dass Vs Kamla Rani

Bhagat Ram Vs Mohan Lal and Others

Jatinder Singh Vs Amrik Singh and Others

Rajesh Nayyar Vs Jagtar Singh

Ramesh Kumar Vs Nischal Rishi & Anr.

Ranjit Kaur Vs Sukhpal Singh