IN T 120 Simerjeet K Pankaj Tre CORAM: Present:- NIDHI GU 1. is for tran respondent Act,1955 (f Kaur” pend Court of com 2. i) ii) iii) iv) v) TA-658-2026 (O & M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA AT CHANDIGAR Transfer Application No.6 Date of decision :-14.05 rjeet Kaur Versus Trehan AM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDH Mr. Jagpal Singh, Advocate for the applicant. I GUPTA J. (Oral) Prayer in this Transfer Applicat r transfer of the petition bearing No ndent-husband under Sections13(i)(ia) 955 (for short ‘the Act’) titled “Pankaj pending in the Court of Principal Judge of competent jurisdiction at Ludhiana. Learned counsel for the applican that the parties were married on rites and rituals. That no child was born out of thi iii) that the applicant-wife is l respondent-husband and living mercy at Ludhiana. iv) that the applicant is unemployed and totally dependent upon her husband is not paying anything That the distance between place wife i.e. Ludhiana and the p 1 UNJAB AND HARYANA IGARH n No.658 of 2026 (O & M) .05.2026 …..Applicant …..Respondent NIDHI GUPTA pplication filed by applicant-wife ng No.HMA/413/2025 filed by (i)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage ankaj Trehan Singh vs. Simarjeet Judge, Family Court, Mohali to a plicant has contended :- ied on 25.8.2024 according to Sikh t of this wedlock. is living separately from the living with her parents at their ployed, having no source of income n her parents; and the respondent- ng to her towards maintenance. place of residence of the applicant- the place of proceedings under VIJAY ASIJA 2026.05.18 19.00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document vi) 3. transfer of t learned cou Cr.P.C. and at Ludhiana said two cas the applican the same a Learned cou that in case apprehends 4. 5. counsel for unemployed is difficult Ludhiana cases, filed provided. W the respond admitted by that regard h TA-658-2026 (O & M) Sections13(i)(ia) of the Act, filed pending before the Principal Jud about 100 kilometers one side. that there is no proficient male applicant, who can accompany Court of proceedings at Mohali aged persons and suffering from It is inter alia on these groun er of the case, as detailed in para 1 abo d counsel for the applicant that two case C. and the other under the DV Act filed dhiana. However, on Court query regar wo cases filed by the applicant at Ludhia plicant was unable to provide the details ame are also not mentioned in the pr ed counsel for the applicant submits th n case she goes to attend the procee hends that the respondent may harm her. I have heard learned counsel for I find no merit in the submiss el for the applicant as it is admit ployed; whereas the respondent is stated ficult for the respondent to take leave to attend the proceedings of Court. , filed by the applicant before the Court . With regard to the submission on spondent can cause harm to the appli ted by learned counsel for the applicant egard has ever been registered by the app 2 ct, filed by the respondent-husband, pal Judge, Family Court,Mohali, is male member in the family of the pany her to visit and attend the ohali because the parents are old from age related ailments. grounds that applicant prays for 1 above. It is further submitted by o cases i.e. one under Section 125 filed by the applicant are pending regarding providing details of the udhiana Court, learned counsel for tails of that cases. The details of the present Transfer Application. mits that the applicant apprehends roceedings at Mohali Court, she m her. sel for the applicant. ubmissions advanced by learned admitted that the applicant is ed to be working. As such, it leave from work and come to Court. The details of alleged two Court at Ludhiana have not been n on behalf of the applicant that applicant, on Court query, it is licant that no police complaint in he applicant at any stage. VIJAY ASIJA 2026.05.18 19.00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 6. of transfer e However, in Court, as w which may Das’ wher dismissed t husband.Re Court wher applications Smt. Akhw Nisha alias 7. present case finding no m May 14, 202 Vijay Asija Whether spe Whether Rep TA-658-2026 (O & M) This Court is well aware of the p nsfer emanating from matrimonial dispu ver, in certain similar cases as the prese , as well as this Court have refused relie may be referred to is: (2006) 9 SCC 1 wherein Hon’ble Supreme Court u ssed the wife’s application seeking tran Reference in this regard may also b where, in similar circumstances this C ations filed on behalf of the wife. The Akhwinder Kaur Vs. Sh. Gurpreet Sin alias Manisha vs. Amarveer Yadav. Accordingly, in view of the fa nt case as noted above, as also the prece g no merit in this application, the same i Pending application(s) if any sta , 2026 Asija er speaking/reasoned Yes / No er Reportable Yes / No 3 f the preponderance of law in cases l disputes is in favour of the wife. present one, the Hon’ble Supreme d relief to the wife. One such case SCC 197 ‘Anindita Das Vs. Srijit urt under similar circumstances ng transfer of petition filed by the also be made to two cases of this this Court had dismissed transfer e. These are: TA no. 126 of 2018 Singh; and TA No. 299 of 2019 the facts and circumstances of the e precedents of Case law as above, same is hereby dismissed. ny stand disposed of. ( NIDHI GUPTA ) JUDGE VIJAY ASIJA 2026.05.18 19.00 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document