Priya Vs Akshay and Others

Present: Mr. Sushil Jain, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. Nitin Bhanwala, Advocate for r espondent No.1. Mr. Sunny Singla, Advocate for re s pondent No.2. ****

¶12

HARKESH MANUJA, J. (Oral)

¶13

Th e applicant-wife, by way of pr e sent application, seeks transfe r of petition dated 1 0 .12.2015 titled “Akshay vs. Priya and others” filed under Sec t ion 13(1)(i), 13(1)( i a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 ( hereinafter to be referred as “divorce petition” ) at the instance of respo n dent-husband; from the Court of learned Princip a l Judge, Family Court, Jind to t he learned Principal Judge, Fa m ily Court, Sonipat.

¶14

Br i efly stating, the marriage bet w een the applicant and respon d ent No.1 was sole m nized on 18.07.2021; out of t h is wedlock, a male child nam e ly, Jiyansh Singla was born on 08.09.2022. O n account of matrimonial dis c ord between the pa r ties, the above mentioned divo r ce petition came to be preferre d at the instance o f respondent No.1-husband. T h ereupon, the present applica t ion seeking transfer thereof came to be filed by the a pplicant-wife.

¶15

MOHMED ATIK 2026.07.24 09:08 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

¶16

2

¶17

TA No.629 of 2026

¶18

Le a rned counsel for the applic a nt, inter alia, contends that the applicant-wife i s residing along with her mi n or son in her parental hous e at Sonipat . Accor d ingly, a prayer is made for tran s fer of the above mentioned div o rce petition filed a t the instance of respondent-h u sband from the Court of lear n ed Principal Judge , Family Court, Jind to the lear n ed Principal Judge, Family Court, Sonipat.

¶19

On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents veheme n tly opposes the pra y er made on behalf of the applic a nt. 5 . I h ave heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the paper-book.

¶20

In t he present case, admittedly, th e applicant-wife has filed a peti t ion bearing No .MNT/76/2026 under Section 144 of BNSS, 2023 for grant of maintenance, w h ich is pending before the lear n ed Principal Judge, Family Court, Sonipat.

¶21

As per the averments made in t h e present transfer application, the applicant-wife a longwith her minor son is resid i ng at her parental house and ha s no independent so u rce of income. The applicant is facing great difficulty in bea r ing the litigation charges and travelling expenses i n pursuing the said case and for the financials, she i s totally dependent upon her par e nts.

¶22

Fu r thermore, the Hon’ble Suprem e Court in its decision rendere d in Manjula Singh Chouhan Versus Vishal Singh Chouhan, reported as “ 2019 (13) SCC 660” hel d that, in the interest of both th e parties, all connected matrimo n ial proceedings sh o uld ordinarily be heard by t he same Court and, accordin g ly, allowed the tr a nsfer application therein. Re l evant paragraph nos.3 to 5 are extracted hereu n der:-

¶23

MOHMED ATIK 2026.07.24 09:08 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

¶24

3

¶25

TA No.629 of 2026

¶26

“3. As per the submission of t h e appellant, two cases are alr e ady pe n ding in Family Court, Bhopal, an d it will be in the interests of bot h the pa rt ies to try all their cases in Bhop a l. Learned counsel for the respon d ent ho w ever, submits that it will suit to the appellant only, therefore, tra n sfer m ay not be permitted. The fact rema i ns that the respondent has to trav e l to B ho pal for conduct of other cases pe n ding in Family Court, Bhopal. 4. We are of the view that it wil l be in the interests of both the pa r ties th at all their cases be heard together by the same Court. 5. Therefore, H.M.A. Case No.71/2016 is transferred from Fa m ily Co u rt, Indore to the Family Court, B h opal.”

¶27

Co n sidering the aforesaid facts a nd circumstances, in the hu m ble opinion of this C ourt, since a petition under Section 144 of BNSS, 2023 for g r ant of maintenance is pending adjudication at So n ipat, therefore, it would be in the interest of both the parties that all their cases be heard together at the same pl a ce. Consequently t h e transfer application is allowed and the divorce petition u n der Section 13(1)(i ) , 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marri a ge Act i.e. dated 10.12.2015 ti t led “Akshay vs. Priya and others” filed by respondent No.1-husband, sta n ds transferred fro m the Court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Jind to the learned Princi p al Judge, Family Court, Son i pat. The requisite record of the aforesaid case be sent by the learned Family Co u rt, Jind to the Court concerned. 10. Pe n ding miscellaneous application ( s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.

¶28

(HARKESH MANUJA) July 21, 2026 JUDGE Atik

¶29

W h ether speaking/reasoned Ye s /No W h ether reportable Ye s /No

¶30

MOHMED ATIK 2026.07.24 09:08 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment

Priya v. Akshay and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Priya v. Akshay and Others

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

Devahuti Vs Love Kumar

Ishwar Vs Dayanand

Ishwar Vs Baru and Ors.

Pooja Rani Alias Neha Vs Neeraj Jagga

Thath Singh Vs State of Haryana and Others

Nandni Vs Sachin Kumar