Allowed

Sapna v. Sandeep

Punjab & Haryana HC19 Dec 2013TA/376/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Punjab & Haryana allowed a transfer application filed by the wife under Section 24 CPC. The court ordered the husband's Section 9 petition to be transferred from Karnal to Sirsa due to the wife's lack of income and the significant travel distance required to attend hearings.

What did the court decide?

Transfer of the petition under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act from Karnal to Sirsa was ordered.

Sapna Vs Sandeep — Matrimonial and Divorce | Punjab & Haryana HC (2013)

¶1

Manoj Kumar 2013.12.21 13:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh

¶2

TA 376 /2013 (O&M)

¶3

#1#

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶5

TA 376 /2013 (O&M) Date of decision: 19.12.2013

¶6

Sapna

¶7

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

¶8

¶9

Sandeep

¶10

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

¶11

CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH

¶12

Present:Mr. H.K. Aurora, Advocate for the petitioner. None for the respondent-husband.

¶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 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act,1955 (for short “the Act”) titled Sandeep Vs. Sapna from the Court of learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Karnal to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Sirsa.

¶15

It is stated that the marriage between the parties was solemnized on 22.9.2012 at Village Bappan, Tehsil & District Sirsa. 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 Karnal on 28.4.2013. Petitioner is stated to be residing separately at her parental home at Sirsa where she has filed three proceedings, namely (i) petition under Section 12 of the Domestic and Violence Act (ii) petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C and (iii) complaint under Sections

¶16

TA 376 /2013 (O&M)

¶17

#2#

¶18

498-A/406/323/506/34 IPC.

¶19

Thereafter, the respondent husband filed a petition under Section 9 of the Act which, as noticed above, is pending in the Court of learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Karnal.

¶20

It is averred that the petitioner wife is a house wife, has no source of income and is fully dependent upon her father 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 Karnal which is about 250 kms away from Sirsa.

¶21

None has appeared on behalf of the respondent-husband to controvert the aforesaid facts. Thus, 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 9 of the Act titled Sandeep Vs. Sapna from the Court of learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Karnal is ordered to be withdrawn and transferred to the District Courts, Sirsa for disposal in accordance with law from the stage of withdrawal.

¶23

December 19, 2013 ( JASWANT SINGH ) manoj JUDGE

Sapna v. Sandeep

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sapna v. Sandeep

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

Rajesh Kumar Vs Raj Kumar Chauhan

Jagan Nath Vs Bachan Ram & Anr.

Gurpreet Kaur Vs Bittu Singh and Others

Anil Devi Vs Nasib Singh

Usha Rani Alias Madavi Vs Sandeep Kumar

Balbir Singh Vs Improvement Trust Patiala and Ors.