Allowed¶24

Renu v. Vikas Dahiya

Punjab & Haryana HC28 Apr 2025TA/430/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

TA-430-2024; Renu v. Vikas Dahiya; Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh; Archana Puri, J.; transfer application; matrimonial dispute; divorce petition transfer; Section 13 Hindu Marriage Act; DMC/524/2023; Family Court Rohtak to Jind; convenience of wife; ex parte respondent; Section 12 Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act; Section 125 Cr.P.C.; District and Sessions Judge Jind; parties to appear within one month.

What did the court decide?

Transfer application allowed: divorce petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act (DMC/524/2023, 'Vikas Dahiya Vs. Renu') transferred from the Family Court, Rohtak to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Jind; requisite record to be sent to the District and Sessions Judge, Jind for assignment to the Family Court, Jind; parties directed to appear before the Family Court, Jind within one month.

Renu Vs Vikas Dahiya — Domestic Violence | Punjab & Haryana HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶24

Issue for consideration

Whether the divorce petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act (DMC/524/2023, titled 'Vikas Dahiya Vs. Renu') filed by the respondent-husband and pending in the Family Court, Rohtak should be transferred to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Jind in the interest of the applicant-wife's convenience.

¶18

Court's answer

In transfer applications arising out of matrimonial disputes, Courts generally lean towards the convenience of the wife.

¶24

Ratio / Principle

Considering the convenience of the wife, the respondent's failure to resist the application (having been proceeded against ex parte), and the two related petitions (under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act and Section 125 Cr.P.C.) already pending at Jind and being pursued by the respondent, the transfer application is hereby allowed and the petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act i.e. DMC/524/2023 titled 'Vikas Dahiya Vs. Renu' stands transferred from the Family Court, Rohtak to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Jind.

¶24

Key takeaways

The requisite record of the transferred case is to be sent by the Family Court, Rohtak, to the District and Sessions Judge, Jind, who shall assign the petition to the Family Court, Jind.ratio¶24
Both parties are directed to appear before the Family Court, Jind, within a period of one month.ratio¶28

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Punjab and Haryana High Court at Chandigarh (Archana Puri, J., oral) — Transfer Application TA-430-2024 (decided 28.04.2025): Applicant-wife Renu sought transfer of the divorce petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act (DMC/524/2023, 'Vikas Dahiya Vs. Renu'), filed by respondent-husband Vikas Dahiya and pending in the Family Court, Rohtak, to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Jind. Respondent, despite service and telephonic intimation to his erstwhile counsel, twice failed to appear and was proceeded against ex parte. Grounds urged: marriage solemnised on 24.03.2005, parties separated by matrimonial dispute, minor son (about 15, Class 9, lawn tennis trainee at Gurugram) in the applicant's custody, pending petitions under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act and Section 125 Cr.P.C. at Jind being pursued by the respondent, and about 60 km commute burden. Observing that Courts generally lean towards the convenience of the wife in matrimonial transfer applications and noting the respondent's non-resistance and the two companion cases already at Jind, the judge allowed the application: the petition stands transferred from the Family Court, Rohtak to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Jind; the requisite record is to be sent to the District and Sessions Judge, Jind for assignment to the Family Court, Jind; and both parties are directed to appear before the Family Court, Jind within one month.

¶1

¶2

TA-430-2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

Sr. No.229

¶5

TA-430-2024 Date of Decision: 28.04.2025

RENU

....Applicant

Versus

VIKAS DAHIYA

.....Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ARCHANA PURI

¶12

Present:Mr. Gurvinder Singh Sidhu, Advocate for the applicant.

¶13

None for the respondent.

¶14

¶15

ARCHANA PURI, J. (Oral)

¶16

As per the observations made in the order dated 25.03.2025, despite service, the respondent did not make appearance on that date. However, as per office noting, the counsel for the respondent, who had earlier made appearance, has been informed telephonically. Despite that, the respondent has not made appearance today also. As such, the respondent is proceeded against ex parte .

¶17

The counsel for the applicant heard.

¶18

The applicant-wife has filed the present application for seeking transfer of the petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act i.e. DMC/524/2023, titled ‘Vikas Dahiya Vs. Renu’, filed by the respondenthusband, pending in the Family Court, Rohtak and she seeks transfer of the same to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Jind.

¶19

It is submitted by the counsel for the applicant that the marriage between the parties to the lis, had taken place on 24.03.2005. However, on

¶20

Sonu 2025.04.28 16:42 I agree to specified portions of this document P&HHC

¶21

¶22

TA-430-2024

¶23

account of the matrimonial dispute, the parties are residing separate. One son born from the said wedlock, who is about 15 years old, is in the care and custody of the applicant. The applicant has filed the petition under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act and the petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C., which are pending in the Courts at Jind and the respondent is pursuing both the said petitions. Furthermore, it is submitted that it shall be difficult for the applicant to defend the divorce petition, while pending at Rohtak, as the son, who is though 15 years old and is a student of 9^th Class, but however, he is a promising Lawn Tennis player, for which he is taking coaching from the Tennis Institute at Gurugram. In the given circumstances, it is submitted that it is difficult for the applicant to commute a distance of about 60 kilometres, to defend the divorce petition.

¶24

In view of the submissions aforesaid and considering the fact that generally, the Courts lean towards the convenience of wife in the transfer applications relating to the matrimonial disputes, more particularly, when the respondent has not come forward to resist the application and also considering the fact about two cases arising from this matrimonial dispute i.e. the petition under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act and the petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C., already pending in the Courts at Jind, which are being pursued by the respondent, the transfer application is hereby allowed and the petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act i.e. DMC/524/2023, titled ‘Vikas Dahiya Vs. Renu’, filed by the respondent-husband, stands transferred from the Family Court, Rohtak, to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Jind. The requisite record of the aforesaid case be sent by the Family Court, Rohtak, to the District and Sessions Judge, Jind.

¶25

Sonu 2025.04.28 16:42 I agree to specified portions of this document P&HHC

¶26

¶27

TA-430-2024

¶28

Learned District and Sessions Judge, Jind, shall assign the said petition to the Family Court, Jind. Even, the parties are directed to appear before the Family Court, Jind, within a period of one month from today onwards.

¶29

28.04.2025

¶30

(ARCHANA PURI) JUDGE

¶31

Himanshu

¶32

Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes Whether reportable : Yes/No

¶33

Sonu 2025.04.28 16:42 I agree to specified portions of this document P&HHC

Renu v. Vikas Dahiya

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Renu v. Vikas Dahiya

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

(O&M)Gurdev Singh Vs Thanesar Singh

Ramesh Vs Ram Kumar and Ors.

Deepshikha Vs Vikas

Anajli Vs Vishal Verma

Sukhwinder Kaur Vs Davinder Singh

Teeka Ram Alias Tekchand Vs Raghu Nandan Alias Ruggi and Ors.