IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA 153 Gori Sharma @ Goldy Umesh Sharma CORAM: Present:- NIDHI GUPTA J. (Oral) 1. wife is for transfer of the petition Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act,1955 (for short ‘the Act’) bearing No.DMC/783/2023 titled as “Umesh Sharma vs. Gouri Sharma @ Goldi Sharma” (Annexure P Family Court, Rohtak to a Court of competent jurisdiction at Palwal. 2. i) ii) iii) Transfer Application No.1320 of 2025 (O & M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Transfer Application Date of decision :-21.05.2026 Gori Sharma @ Goldy Versus Umesh Sharma CORAM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Ms. Deepinder Kaur, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. Maneet Kaushik, Advocate for the respondent. NIDHI GUPTA J. (Oral) Prayer in this Transfer Application is for transfer of the petition filed by respondent Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act,1955 (for short ‘the Act’) bearing No.DMC/783/2023 titled as “Umesh Sharma vs. Gouri Sharma @ Goldi Sharma” (Annexure P Family Court, Rohtak to a Court of competent jurisdiction at Palwal. Learned counsel for the applicant has contended : That the parties were married on to Hindu rites and rituals. That a female child was born out of this wedlock on 24.6.2023, who is in the care and custody of the applicant. iii) That the applicant-wife is living separately from the respondent-husband since 09.4.2023 and living with her parents at their mercy at Palwal. 1320 of 2025 (O & M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Transfer Application No.1320 of 2025 (O & M) .05.2026 …..Applicant …..Respondent HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA s. Deepinder Kaur, Advocate Mr. Maneet Kaushik, Advocate for the respondent. Transfer Application filed by applicant- filed by respondent-husband under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act,1955 (for short ‘the Act’) bearing No.DMC/783/2023 titled as “Umesh Sharma vs. Gouri Sharma @ Goldi Sharma” (Annexure P-1) pending in the Family Court, Rohtak to a Court of competent jurisdiction at Palwal. Learned counsel for the applicant has contended :- the parties were married on 14.11.2021 according e child was born out of this wedlock on 24.6.2023, who is in the care and custody of the wife is living separately from the husband since 09.4.2023 and living with her parents at their mercy at Palwal. VIJAY ASIJA 2026.05.25 20.48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document iv) v) vi) vii) 3. transfer of the 4. controvert the above said facts, however, oppose the prayer made by learned counsel for the applicant regarding transfer of the proceedings under Section 13(1)(ia) the Court of competent j Transfer Application No.1320 of 2025 (O & M) iv) That the applicant is unemployed, having no source of income and totally dependent upon her parents and the respondent-husband, who is working as PDI in charge in Ransh Cars Pvt. Ltd., authorized dealer of South Korean multinational car manufacturing compan monthly salary of Rs.2,00,000/ anything to her or the minor child That the proceedings arising out of petitions : (a) under Section 125 Cr.P.C. bearing No.MNT/120/2023; and (b) FIR No.265 dated 09.4.2023 under Sections 323, 34, 498-A and 506 IPC, at Police Station City Rohtak (Annexure P filed by the applicant-wife, are pending in the Courts having competent jurisdiction at Palwal. vi) That the distance between place of res applicant-wife i.e. Palwal and the place of proceedings under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Act, filed by the respondent-husband, pending before the Family Court, Rohtak, is about 144 kilometers on one side. vii) That there is no proficient male the applicant, who can accompany her to the Court of proceedings at Rohtak. It is inter alia on these grounds that applicant transfer of the case, as detailed in para 1 above. Learned counsel for the respondent is controvert the above said facts, however, oppose the prayer made by learned counsel for the applicant regarding transfer of the proceedings Section 13(1)(ia) of the Act, filed by the respondent the Court of competent jurisdiction at Rohtak on the 1320 of 2025 (O & M) 2 hat the applicant is unemployed, having no source of income and totally dependent upon her parents and the husband, who is working as PDI in charge in Ransh Cars Pvt. Ltd., authorized dealer of South Korean multinational car manufacturing company and drawing salary of Rs.2,00,000/- per month, is not paying or the minor child towards maintenance. That the proceedings arising out of petitions :- under Section 125 Cr.P.C. bearing No.MNT/120/2023; and FIR No.265 dated 09.4.2023 under Sections A and 506 IPC, at Police Station City Rohtak (Annexure P-2), wife, are pending in the Courts having competent jurisdiction at Palwal. That the distance between place of residence of the wife i.e. Palwal and the place of proceedings of the Act, filed by the husband, pending before the Family Court, Rohtak, is about 144 kilometers on one side. That there is no proficient male member in the family of the applicant, who can accompany her to the Court of It is inter alia on these grounds that applicant prays for case, as detailed in para 1 above. Learned counsel for the respondent is not in a position to controvert the above said facts, however, oppose the prayer made by learned counsel for the applicant regarding transfer of the proceedings of the Act, filed by the respondent-husband to urisdiction at Rohtak on the ground that the VIJAY ASIJA 2026.05.25 20.48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document present Transfer Application has been filed just to harass the respondent 5. the case file. 6. is well established. In this regard, judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court rendered in Sha,” 2022 Live Law (SC) 627 Hon’ble Supreme Court has held as under: 7. “Sumita Singh vs Kumar Sanjay”, 2002 SC 396 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 Transfer Application No.1320 of 2025 (O & M) present Transfer Application has been filed just to harass the respondent-husband. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case file. The legal position in such like c is well established. 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 most relevant wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held as under: “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 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 cir 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. 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 desirab should be tried together by the same Judge so as to avoid multiplicity in trial of the same issues and conflict of decisions.” Further reliance can be placed upon the “Sumita Singh vs Kumar Sanjay”, 2002 SC 396 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 1320 of 2025 (O & M) 3 present Transfer Application has been filed just to harass the I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused The legal position in such like cases as the present one, is well established. In this regard, judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme N.C.V. Aishwarya vs A.S. Saravana Karthik , is most relevant wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held as under:- 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 the transfer of the suit, appeal or other proceeding. In matrimonial matters, wherever Courts der 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 t be looked at while considering 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 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 VIJAY ASIJA 2026.05.25 20.48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document weightage and consideration to the convenience of the fem 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.” 8. aforesaid principle of law. Accordingly, it is well settled that while considering the transfer of a matrimonial dispute/case 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, connectivi the place to and fro from her place of residence as well as bearing of the litigation charges and travelling expenses. 9. i.e. Sumita Singh’s (supra) and Supreme Court, this Court deems it appropriate to allow the present petition, subject to the following conditions: Transfer Application No.1320 of 2025 (O & M) weightage and consideration to the convenience of the fem 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.” Even this Court in number of cases has followed the aforesaid principle of law. Accordingly, it is well settled that while considering the transfer of a matrimonial dispute/case of the wife, the Court is to consider the family condition of the wife, he 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, connectivi the place to and fro from her place of residence as well as bearing of the litigation charges and travelling expenses. In view of the facts mentioned above and the Sumita Singh’s case (supra), Rajani Kishor Pardeshi’s (supra) and N.C.V. Aishwarya’s case (supra) passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, this Court deems it appropriate to allow the present petition, subject to the following conditions: a) The petition filed by respondent husband under Section 13(1)(ia) of Hindu Marriage Act,1955, bearing No. DMC/783/2023 (Annexure P as ‘Umesh Sharma vs. Gouri Sharma @ Goldi Sharma’, pending in the Family Court, Rohtak is transferred to a Court of competent jurisdiction at Palwal. 1320 of 2025 (O & M) 4 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 urt in number of cases has followed the aforesaid 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, he 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. facts mentioned above and the judgments Rajani Kishor Pardeshi’s case case (supra) passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, this Court deems it appropriate to allow the present petition, subject to the following conditions:- The petition filed by respondent husband under of Hindu Marriage Act,1955, DMC/783/2023 (Annexure P-1) titled Umesh Sharma vs. Gouri Sharma @ Goldi ’, pending in the Family Court, Rohtak is transferred to a Court of competent jurisdiction at VIJAY ASIJA 2026.05.25 20.48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 8. to refer the case before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre for exploring the possibility of some amicable settlement betwe parties. 9. between the parties, will accommodate them with one date in one calendar month. 11. ordinate Bench of this Court in Nitin Talwar; TA No. 1322 of 2022, Jaswinder Kaur v Gurvinderjeet Singh Karmajit Singh. May 21, 202 Vijay Asija Whether speaking/reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No Transfer Application No.1320 of 2025 (O & M) b) The learned District Judge, transfer complete record pertaining to the aforesaid case to District Judge, c) The parties are directed to appear before the District & Sessions Judge d) The District Judge, Palwal petition to the Court of competent jurisdiction The concerned Court at Palwal to refer the case before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre for exploring the possibility of some amicable settlement betwe The Court concerned, where the litigation pending between the parties, will accommodate them with one date in one calendar month. I am supported by the decisions rendered by a Co ordinate Bench of this Court in TA No. 1315/2022, Ro Nitin Talwar; TA No. 1322 of 2022, Jaswinder Kaur v Gurvinderjeet Singh; and TA No. 1323 of 2022, Usha Rani v Karmajit Singh. Disposed of. Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of. , 2026 Whether speaking/reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No 1320 of 2025 (O & M) 5 District Judge, Rohtak is directed to record pertaining to the aforesaid case to District Judge, Palwal. The parties are directed to appear before the District & Sessions Judge, Palwal on 24.6.2026. Palwal will assign the said petition to the Court of competent jurisdiction. Palwal will make all endeavour to refer the case before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre for exploring the possibility of some amicable settlement between the The Court concerned, where the litigation pending between the parties, will accommodate them with one date in one I am supported by the decisions rendered by a Co- TA No. 1315/2022, Rohini Arora v Nitin Talwar; TA No. 1322 of 2022, Jaswinder Kaur v TA No. 1323 of 2022, Usha Rani v Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of. ( NIDHI GUPTA ) JUDGE VIJAY ASIJA 2026.05.25 20.48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document