Partly allowed¶¶29

Suman v. Sandeep

Punjab & Haryana HC12 Jan 2026TA/554/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Transfer application TA; wife's transfer petitions; Section 13 Hindu Marriage Act; Section 12(1)(b) Hindu Marriage Act; HMA/825/2022; HMA/489/2023; transfer from Family Court Yamuna Nagar at Jagadhri to Panchkula; consent of respondent; balancing convenience of parties; distance about 100 kms; no earning source of applicant; Punjab and Haryana High Court; Justice Archana Puri; decided 12.01.2026.

What did the court decide?

Both transfer applications partly allowed; petitions HMA/825/2022 (Section 13 HMA) and HMA/489/2023 (Section 12(1)(b) HMA) transferred from the Family Court, Yamuna Nagar at Jagadhri to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Panchkula; requisite records to be sent to the District and Sessions Judge, Panchkula; parties to appear before the concerned Court within one month. ¶¶29

Suman Vs Sandeep — Matrimonial and Divorce | Punjab & Haryana HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶29

Issue for consideration

Whether the two matrimonial petitions filed by the respondent-husband, pending before the Courts at Yamuna Nagar at Jagadhri, should be transferred, and if so, to which forum - Chandigarh as sought by the applicant, or Panchkula as suggested by the respondent.

¶¶19

Court's answer

Both transfer applications (TA-554-2023 and TA-621-2024) are partly allowed; the petition under Section 13 HMA (HMA/825/2022) and the petition under Section 12(1)(b) HMA (HMA/489/2023), both filed by the respondent-husband, stand transferred from the Family Court, Yamuna Nagar at Jagadhri to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Panchkula.

¶¶29

Ratio / Principle

Panchkula was selected instead of Chandigarh in view of the respondent's no objection to transfer of both cases to Panchkula and balancing the convenience of the parties.

¶¶29

Key takeaways

The learned District and Sessions Judge, Panchkula shall assign the said cases to the Family Court, Panchkula, and the parties are directed to appear before the concerned Court within a period of one month.ratio¶¶30

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Transfer Applications (Punjab and Haryana High Court, Archana Puri, J., 12.01.2026) - Wife sought transfer of two matrimonial petitions filed by the husband under Section 13 and Section 12(1)(b) of the Hindu Marriage Act (HMA/825/2022 and HMA/489/2023), pending before the Family Court, Yamuna Nagar at Jagadhri, to Chandigarh; respondent had no objection to transfer to Panchkula, where both parties' convenience would be served; held, both transfer applications partly allowed and both petitions transferred to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Panchkula; District and Sessions Judge, Panchkula to assign the cases to the Family Court, Panchkula; parties directed to appear within one month.

¶1

¶2

TA-554-2023 AND TA-621-2024

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

Sr. No.104 (2 cases)

¶5

Date of Decision: 12.01.2026 1. TA-554-2023 SUMAN ....Applicant Versus SANDEEP .....Respondent 2. TA-621-2024 SUMAN ....Applicant Versus

¶6

SANDEEP

¶7

.....Respondent

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ARCHANA PURI

¶9

Present:Mr. Mrigank Sharma, Advocate for the applicant (in both the cases).

¶10

Mr. Deepak Jaglan, Advocate for Mr. Rampal Kaushik, Advocate for the respondent (in both the cases).

¶11

¶12

ARCHANA PURI, J. (Oral)

¶13

These are two applications filed by Suman-applicant/wife, for seeking transfer of the litigation, pending between the parties to the lis.

¶14

HIMANSHU VATS 2026.01.12 16:42 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

¶15

¶16

TA-554-2023 AND TA-621-2024

¶17

TA-554-2023 has been filed for seeking transfer of the petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act i.e. HMA/825/2022, titled ‘Sandeep Vs. Suman’, filed by the respondent-husband.

¶18

TA-621-2024 has been filed for seeking transfer of the petition under Section 12(1)(b) of the Hindu Marriage Act i.e. HMA/489/2023, titled ‘Sandeep Vs. Suman’ , filed by the respondent-husband.

¶19

Both the aforesaid cases are pending in the Courts at Yamuna Nagar at Jagadhri and the applicant is seeking transfer of the same to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Chandigarh.

¶20

In pursuance of notice issued, respondent made appearance through counsel and filed replies in the respective applications.

¶21

Counsel for the parties heard.

¶22

For the convenience of discussion, the facts are referred to, as pleaded in TA-554-2023.

¶23

At the very outset, it is submitted by the counsel for the applicant that the marriage between the parties to the lis, had taken place on 21.04.2022, but no child was born from the said wedlock. Unfortunately, the matrimonial dispute arose between the parties. The applicant is not having any source of earning. The distance between the two places is stated to be about 100 kms.

¶24

On the other hand, counsel for the respondent makes a submission that the respondent has no objection, if both the cases are transferred to the Courts at Panchkula. Also, it is submitted that the applicant is a resident of Manimajra, Chandigarh and it shall be convenient

¶25

HIMANSHU VATS 2026.01.12 16:42 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

¶26

¶27

TA-554-2023 AND TA-621-2024

¶28

for both the parties, if the cases are transferred to Panchkula, instead of Chandigarh.

¶29

Considering the aforesaid circumstances, considering the submissions made by the counsel for the respondent and also balancing the convenience of the parties, both the transfer applications i.e. TA-554-2023 and TA-621-2024 are partly allowed and the petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act i.e. HMA/825/2022, titled ‘Sandeep Vs. Suman’, as well as the petition under Section 12(1)(b) of the Hindu Marriage Act i.e. HMA/489/2023, titled ‘Sandeep Vs. Suman’, both filed by the respondenthusband, stand transferred from the Family Court, Yamuna Nagar at Jagadhri, to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Panchkula. The requisite records of the aforesaid cases be sent by the Family Court, Yamuna Nagar, to the District and Sessions Judge, Panchkula.

¶30

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

¶31

(ARCHANA PURI) 12.01.2026 JUDGE Himanshu Vats Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes Whether reportable : Yes/No

¶32

HIMANSHU VATS 2026.01.12 16:42 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

Suman v. Sandeep

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suman v. Sandeep

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

Neha Sinhmar Vs Pardeep Kumar

Rhythm Vs Manjit Singh

Geetpal Makkar Vs Jinni Makkar and Ors.

Dhanwanti and Ors. Vs Sandeep Kumar and Ors.

Radhika Pathak Vs Pardeep Mohan Pathak

Neena Roy Vs Rahul Sharma