This transfer application under Section 24 CPC sought to shift a Section 13 divorce petition against the petitioner from Bathinda to Sirsa due to distance and lack of income. The Court dismissed the application, holding no ground was made out for transfer as counsel attends on behalf of the petitioner.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Manoj Kumar #1# 2014.01.02 12:57I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document High Court Chandigarh
TA No.415 of 2012(O&M)
IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
TA No.415 of 2012(O&M) Date of Decision: 5.12.2013
Veerpal Kaur
....Petitioner
Versus
Balwinder Pal
....Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH
Present: Mr. Jagjit Gill, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. T.C. Dhanwal, Advocate for the respondent.
JASWANT SINGH, J
Petitioner by way of filing the present transfer application under Section 24 CPC, is seeking transfer of the petition filed under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short “the Act”) by the respondent titled Balvinder Pal Vs. Veerpal Kaur and Anr. from the court of learned Addl. District Judge, Bathinda to a court of competent jurisdiction at Sirsa; with a further prayer for staying the proceedings in the aforesaid petition U/s 13 of the Act during the pendency of the present application.
It is alleged that the parties solemnized their marriage on 29.6.1997 at Nehri Colony Rai Ka Khurd, Tehsil and District Bathinda and out of their wedlock, a son was born on 10.12.1998. Due to matrimonial dispute, petitioner along with minod child is stated to be turned out of her matrimonial home at Bathinda and at present she is
TA No.415 of 2012(O&M) #2#
stated to be residing at her parental home at Sirsa where she has already filed two proceedings, namely, (i) petition under Section 9 of the Act and (ii) petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C.
It is alleged that petitioner has no source of income and is fully dependent upon her parents and it is very difficult for her to attend the proceedings initiated at Bathinda, which is about 150 kms from Sirsa.
After hearing learned counsel for the parties and going through the paper book, this Court is not persuaded to the prayer made on behalf of the petitioner.
Moreover, it is a civil dispute and the petitioner is not expected to be present in person on each and every date of hearing and her counsel will always be there to attend the court on her behalf before the Court at Bathinda until and unless she is directed to be present in person.
No ground is made out to entertain the present petition.
Dismissed.
December 5, 2013 ( JASWANT SINGH ) manoj JUDGE
3 issues framed by the court
Whether a transfer application under Section 24 CPC can be allowed to transfer a petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act from Bathinda to Sirsa.
Whether the petitioner's inability to attend proceedings at Bathinda due to distance and lack of income constitutes a valid ground for transfer.
Whether the petitioner is required to be present in person for each hearing in a civil dispute regarding divorce.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Veerpal Kaur
Balwinder Pal
Jaswant Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
