Allowed

Ramanjot Kaur v. Ajmer Singh

Punjab & Haryana HC3 Feb 2026TA/926/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Wife sought transfer of husband's divorce petition from Jalandhar to Ludhiana. The court held that convenience of the wife is not a thumb rule but the custody of a six-year-old school-going child and the wife's lack of earnings outweighed the 60 km distance, and allowed the transfer.

What did the court decide?

Petition under Section 13 HMA transferred from Family Court, Jalandhar to competent court at Ludhiana; parties directed to appear before Family Court, Ludhiana within one month.

Ramanjot Kaur Vs Ajmer Singh — Matrimonial and Divorce | Punjab & Haryana HC (2026)

¶1

¶2

TA-926-2025

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Sr. No.232

¶4

TA-926-2025

¶5

Date of Decision: 03.02.2026

RAMANJOT KAUR

....Applicant

Versus

AJMER SINGH

.....Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ARCHANA PURI

¶12

Present:Mr. Harpreet Pal Singh, Advocate for the applicant.

¶13

Ms. Rishma Verma, Advocate for the respondent (through video conferencing).

¶14

¶15

ARCHANA PURI, J. (Oral)

¶16

The applicant-wife has filed the present application for seeking transfer of the petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act i.e. HMA/1772/2024, titled ‘Ajmer Singh Vs. Ramanjot Kaur’, filed by the respondent-husband, pending in the Family Court, Jalandhar and she seeks transfer of the same to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Ludhiana.

¶17

Upon notice issued, the respondent made appearance through counsel and filed reply.

¶18

Counsel for the parties heard.

¶19

SONU 2026.02.05 09:54 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

¶20

¶21

TA-926-2025

¶22

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 20.01.2019. One son born from the said wedlock, who is about 6 years old, is in the care and custody of the applicant. The applicant is not having any source of earning. On account of the matrimonial dispute, the applicant is residing at her parental place and is dependent upon her brother. The distance between the two places is stated to be about 60 kms. The minor child is also studying in Nursery class. Furthermore, it is submitted that there is no other case, pending between the parties.

¶23

On the other hand, counsel for the respondent submits that the transfer application has been filed, solely for convenience of the applicant. The distance between the two places is only 60 kms., which also has a good transport connectivity.

¶24

It is pertinent to mention that while considering the transfer application relating to the matrimonial dispute, various aspects ought to be taken into consideration. No doubt, the Courts lean towards convenience of the wife, while considering any such transfer application, but however, the same is not a thumb rule. Various other circumstances, spelt out from the material brought on record, ought to be considered and thereupon, balancing of the convenience/inconvenience of both the sides i.e. husband and wife, ought to be made. In the case in hand, the most weighing factor is about the applicant, having the custody of the minor child, who is about 6 years old, more particularly, when she is not having any source of earning.

¶25

SONU 2026.02.05 09:54 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

¶26

¶27

TA-926-2025

¶28

In view of the aforesaid fact situation, more particularly, taking into consideration the custody of the minor child, who is school-going, being with the applicant, though, the distance may be 60 kms., the transfer application is allowed and the petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act i.e. HMA/1772/2024, titled ‘Ajmer Singh Vs. Ramanjot Kaur’, filed by the respondent-husband, stands transferred from the Family Court, Jalandhar, to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Ludhiana. The requisite record of the aforesaid case be sent by the Family Court, Jalandhar, to the District and Sessions Judge, Ludhiana.

¶29

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

¶30

(ARCHANA PURI) 03.02.2026 JUDGE Himanshu Vats Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes Whether reportable : Yes/No

¶31

SONU 2026.02.05 09:54 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document

Ramanjot Kaur v. Ajmer Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramanjot Kaur v. Ajmer Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Royal Sundram Alliance Insurance Company Ltd. Vs Om Parkash and Ors.

Om Parkash Vs Madhu R. & Ors.

Sukhwinder Kaur Vs Kaka Singh

Nirmala Devi and Another Vs Sudhir and Anr.

Mohit Malik Vs Ripual Punia

Rajeshwari Vs Suresh Kumar and Others