Mahima Saini Vs Ashok Saini and Another

read with Section 151 CPC is for transfer of the petition filed by the respondent No.1-husband under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 against the petitioner and pro-forma respondent No.2 titled as “Ashok Saini Vs. Mahima Saini & Another” (Annexure P1) from Mahila Court/Women & Children Special Court, Panipat to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Dharuhera, District Rewari.

¶14

Ld. counsel for the petitioner/wife seeks transfer of the above

¶15

said Petition filed by the respondent No.1/husband under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (Annexure P-1) inter alia on the following grounds:

¶16

i) the parties had solemnized marriage on 12.02.2018; ii) one son was born out of their wedlock, who is in the care and custody of the petitioner/wife;

¶17

SUNENA 2026.05.29 16:10 I agree to specified portions of this document

¶18

TA-599-2025 Page 2 of 5

¶19

iii) due to matrimonial discord, the parties started living separately since 12.03.2024;

¶20

iv) the petitioner is unemployed and has no source of income; v) it is very difficult for the petitioner to travel distance of 195 kms (one side) from Rewari to Panipat with the minor son.

¶21

It is accordingly prayed that the present petition be allowed;

¶22

and the petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 titled as “Ashok Saini Vs. Mahima Saini & Another” (Annexure P1) be transferred from Mahila Court/Women & Children Special Court, Panipat to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Dharuhera, District Rewari.

¶23

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶24

Order sheets show that there has been intermittent appearance on behalf of learned counsel for the respondent(s). Today, none

¶25

has appeared for the respondent. As such, the matter is being heard and decided in the absence of learned counsel for the respondent(s).

¶26

Besides the facts as noted in para 2 hereinabove, which constitute sufficient grounds for transfer, even the legal position in such like cases is well established inasmuch as, convenience of the wife is to be given greater weightage. In this regard, judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court rendered in N.C.V. Aishwarya vs A.S. Saravana Karthik Sha,” 2022 Live Law (SC) 627 , is notable, wherein it has been held as under:-

¶27

“9. The cardinal principle for exercise of power under section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure is that the ends of justice should demand

¶28

SUNENA 2026.05.29 16:10 I agree to specified portions of this document

¶29

TA-599-2025 Page 3 of 5

¶30

the transfer of the suit, appeal or other proceeding. In matrimonial matters, wherever Courts are called upon to consider the plea of transfer, the Courts have to take into consideration the economic soundness of both the parties, the social strata of the spouses and their behavioural pattern, their standard of life prior to the marriage and subsequent thereto and the circumstances of both the parties in eking out their livelihood and under whose protective umbrella they are seeking their sustenance to life. Given the prevailing socioeconomic paradigm in the Indian society, generally, it is the wife's convenience which must be looked at while considering transfer.

¶31

10. Further, when two or more proceedings are pending in different Courts between the same parties which raise common question of fact and law, and when the decisions in the cases are interdependent, it is desirable that they should be tried together by the same Judge so as to avoid multiplicity in trial of the same issues and conflict of decisions.”

¶32

Further reliance can be placed upon the judgments in Sumita Singh vs Kumar Sanjay, 2002 SC 396 and Rajani Kishor Pardeshivs Kishor Babulal Pardeshi, 2005(12) SCC 237 , wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court has observed that “while deciding the transfer application, the Courts are required to give more weightage and consideration to the convenience of the female litigants and transfer of legal proceedings from one Court to another should ordinarily be allowed, taking into consideration their convenience and the Courts should desist from putting female litigants under undue hardships .”

¶33

SUNENA 2026.05.29 16:10 I agree to specified portions of this document

¶34

TA-599-2025 Page 4 of 5

¶35

Even this Court in number of cases has followed the aforesaid

¶36

principle of law. Accordingly, it is well settled that while considering the transfer of a matrimonial dispute/case, at the instance of the wife, the Court is to consider the family condition of the wife, the custody of the minor child, economic condition of the wife, her physical health and earning capacity of the husband and most important the convenience of the wife i.e. she cannot travel alone without assistance of a male member of her family, connectivity of the place to and fro from her place of residence as well as bearing of the litigation charges and travelling expenses.

¶37

In view of the judgments i.e. Sumita Singh’s case (supra), Rajani

¶38

Kishor Pardeshi’s case (supra) and N.C.V. Aishwarya’s case (supra) passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, this Court deems it appropriate to allow the

¶39

present petition, subject to the following conditions: -

¶40

a) The Petition under Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 titled as “Ashok Saini Vs. Mahima Saini & Another” (Annexure P1) is transferred from Mahila Court/Women & Children Special Court, Panipat to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Dharuhera, District Rewari;

¶41

b) The ld. District Judge, Panipat is directed to transfer complete record pertaining to the aforesaid case to District Judge, Rewari.

¶42

c) The parties are directed to appear before the District & Sessions Judge, Rewari on 16.7.2026.

¶43

d) The District Judge, Rewari will assign the said petition to the Court of competent jurisdiction.

¶44

SUNENA 2026.05.29 16:10 I agree to specified portions of this document

¶45

TA-599-2025 Page 5 of 5

¶46

As already noticed above, since the petition is being disposed

¶47

of in the absence of respondent, accordingly, in these peculiar circumstances, in order to ensure appearance of the parties before the District Judge, Rewari on 16.7.2026, it is directed that a copy of this order be sent to the respondent through registered post, besides sending a copy of this order to the District Judges concerned through e-mail. Petitioner

¶48

through her counsel, present in the Court, is directed to ensure her appearance accordingly.

¶49

Present Transfer Application stands allowed as above.

¶50

Pending application(s), if any, stand(s) disposed of.

¶51

27.05.2026 (Nidhi Gupta) Sunena Judge

¶52

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

¶53

SUNENA 2026.05.29 16:10 I agree to specified portions of this document

Mahima Saini v. Ashok Saini and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mahima Saini v. Ashok Saini and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Deeksa Garg Vs Yogesh Jindal

Sushila and Others Vs Rajesh and Another

Ravina Vs Deepak

Sandeep Kaur Vs Tarsem Singh

Davinder Singh and Others Vs Komal

Au Small Finance Bank Ltd. Vs Joginder Singh Lather and Others