Kavita Vs Pankaj Yadav

The petitioner-wife, by way of present application/petition, seeks transfer of petition bearing HMA/1784/2023 , titled “ Pankaj Yadav Versus Kavita” filed under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 at the instance of respondent-husband; from the Court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Gurugram to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Tosham, District Bhiwani.

¶15

[2] Learned counsel for the petitioner prays for transfer of the above said petition from Gurgram to Tosham (Bhiwani) on the following grounds:-

¶16

(i) that the applicant-wife alongwith is residing in her parental house at Bhiwani;

¶17

(ii) that she has no source of income;

¶18

(iii) that there is a distance of about 170 kms. between Gurugram and Tosham;

¶19

(iv) that there is threat to the petitioner from the side of respondent and his family members;

¶20

DINESH KUMAR 2026.07.13 18:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶21

[2]

¶22

T.A. No. 829 of 2025 (O&M)

¶23

(v) that three more cases filed by the petitioner are pending in the Court at Tosham, District Bhiwani.

¶24

[3] On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent vehemently opposes the prayer made on behalf of the petitioner.

¶25

[4] Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner besides going through the record, I find substance in the submission(s) made on behalf of the petitioner.

¶26

[5] Besides the facts/submission(s) noticed on behalf of the petitioner, the legal position in such like cases as the present one is also very clear. Reference in this regard may made to a decision rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in its decision rendered in Manjula Singh Chouhan Versus Vishal Singh Chouhan, reported as 2019 (13) SCC 660 , wherein it has been held that, in the interest of both the parties, all connected matrimonial proceedings should ordinarily be heard by the same Court and, accordingly, allowed the transfer application therein. Relevant paras-3 to 5 of the aforesaid decision are extracted hereunder:-

¶27

“ 3. As per the submission of the appellant, two cases are already pending in Family Court, Bhopal, and it will be in the interests of both the parties to try all their cases in Bhopal. Learned counsel for the respondent however, submits that it will suit to the appellant only, therefore, transfer may not be permitted. The fact remains that the respondent has to travel to Bhopal for conduct of other cases pending in Family Court, Bhopal.

¶28

4. We are of the view that it will be in the interests of both the parties that all their cases be heard together by the same Court. 5. Therefore, H.M.A. Case No.71/2016 is transferred from Family Court, Indore to the Family Court, Bhopal.”

¶29

[6] Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, in the humble opinion of this Court, it would be in the interest of both the parties

¶30

DINESH KUMAR 2026.07.13 18:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶31

[3]

¶32

T.A. No. 829 of 2025 (O&M)

¶33

that all their cases be heard together at same place. Consequently, the transfer application is allowed and the petition bearing HMA/1784/2023 (supra) filed at the instance of respondent-husband, stands transferred from the Family Court, Gurugram to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Family Court, Tosham (Bhiwani). The requisite record of the aforesaid case be sent by the Family Court, Gurugram to the Court concerned at the earliest where the parties would appear within a period of one month from today.

¶34

[7] Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed off.

¶35

July 09, 2026 'dk kamra'	( HARKESH MANUJA ) JUDGE
Whether Speaking/reasoned	Yes/No
Whether Reportable	Yes/No

¶36

DINESH KUMAR 2026.07.13 18:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Kavita v. Pankaj Yadav

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kavita v. Pankaj Yadav

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

Savita Vs Vinod Chopra

Rajandeep Kaur Vs Sukhwinder Singh

Major Singh Vs State of Punjab etc.

Mamta Saini Vs Dhani Ram and Others

Manpreet Kaur Vs Jaideep Singh Naroo

Rimpi Vs Parmod Kumar