IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA 127 Supreet Kaur Kartik Gautam CORAM: Present:- NIDHI GUPTA J. (Oral) 1. wife is for transfer of the petition filed by respondent Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act,1955 (for short ‘the Act’) bearing No.DMC/1223/2025 titled as “Kartik Gautam vs. Supreet Kaur” (Annexure P competent jurisdiction at Ludhiana. 2. i) ii) iii) iv) Transfer Application No.1719 of 2025 (O & M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Transfer Application Date of decision :-22.05.2026 Supreet Kaur Versus Gautam CORAM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Mr. Amitoj Singh Dhaliwal, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. Vrishank Suri, Advocate for the respondent. NIDHI GUPTA J. (Oral) Prayer in this Transfer Application filed by wife is for transfer of the petition filed by respondent Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act,1955 (for short ‘the Act’) bearing No.DMC/1223/2025 titled as “Kartik Gautam vs. Supreet Kaur” (Annexure P-5) pending in the Family Court, competent jurisdiction at Ludhiana. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant has contended : That the parties were married on 13.9.2013. That a male child was born out of this wedlock on 06.12.2014, who is in the c applicant. iii) That the applicant-wife is living separately from the respondent-husband and living with her parents at Ludhiana. iv) That the applicant is presently working as Branch Head/Branch Manager, SBI, ADB, Mehal Kalan, Ba 1719 of 2025 (O & M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH No.1719 of 2025 (O & M) .05.2026 …..Applicant …..Respondent HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Amitoj Singh Dhaliwal, Advocate Mr. Vrishank Suri, Advocate for the respondent. Prayer in this Transfer Application filed by applicant- wife is for transfer of the petition filed by respondent-husband under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act,1955 (for short ‘the Act’) bearing No.DMC/1223/2025 titled as “Kartik Gautam vs. Supreet Kaur” 5) pending in the Family Court, Patiala to a Court of Learned counsel for the applicant has contended :- That the parties were married on 13.9.2013. That a male child was born out of this wedlock on 06.12.2014, who is in the care and custody of the wife is living separately from the husband and living with her parents at That the applicant is presently working as Branch Head/Branch Manager, SBI, ADB, Mehal Kalan, Barnala, VIJAY ASIJA 2026.05.25 20.31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document v) vi) vii) 3. transfer of the case, as detailed in para 1 above. 4. controverted the submissions of learned counsel for the applicant and submits that the applicant by her own saying, as stated in para 17 of the present Transfer Application, that she is going up and down from Ludhiana to Barnala daily as she is posted as Branch Manager in the State Bank of India Bank, ADB at Mehal Kalan, Barnala. On a Court query, learned counsel for the respondent has admitted that the respondent has not paid anything by way of maintenance to t applicant or to their minor son till date. It is, however, submitted that the respondent had offered to pay the same. Transfer Application No.1719 of 2025 (O & M) which place is approximately 70 kilometers away from the place of her residence; however, the respondent not paying anything to her or the child towards maintenance. That the proceedings arising out of : (a) complaint regarding dated 23.7.2025 (Annexure P filed by the applicant-wife, are pending Authority at Ludhiana. vi) That the distance between place of residence of the applicant-wife i.e. Ludhiana and the place of proceedings under Section 9 of the Act, filed by the respondent husband, pending before the Family Court, Patiala, is about 92 kilometers on one side. vii) That there is no proficient male member in the family of the applicant, who can accompany her to the Court of proceedings at Patiala and because of job and minor child it is very difficult for the applicant to attend the proceedings at Patiala. It is inter alia on these grounds that applicant prays for transfer of the case, as detailed in para 1 above. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent has strongly controverted the submissions of learned counsel for the applicant and submits that the applicant by her own saying, as stated in para 17 of the present Transfer Application, that she is going up and down from dhiana to Barnala daily as she is posted as Branch Manager in the State Bank of India Bank, ADB at Mehal Kalan, Barnala. On a Court query, learned counsel for the respondent has admitted that the respondent has not paid anything by way of maintenance to t applicant or to their minor son till date. It is, however, submitted that the respondent had offered to pay the same. 1719 of 2025 (O & M) 2 which place is approximately 70 kilometers away from the place of her residence; however, the respondent-husband is not paying anything to her or the child towards That the proceedings arising out of :- complaint regarding Domestic Violence, dated 23.7.2025 (Annexure P-4) wife, are pending with the Police That the distance between place of residence of the wife i.e. Ludhiana and the place of proceedings of the Act, filed by the respondent- husband, pending before the Family Court, Patiala, is about 92 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 and because of job and minor child it is very difficult for the applicant to attend the It is inter alia on these grounds that applicant prays for transfer of the case, as detailed in para 1 above. rned counsel for the respondent has strongly controverted the submissions of learned counsel for the applicant and submits that the applicant by her own saying, as stated in para 17 of the present Transfer Application, that she is going up and down from dhiana to Barnala daily as she is posted as Branch Manager in the State Bank of India Bank, ADB at Mehal Kalan, Barnala. On a Court query, learned counsel for the respondent has admitted that the respondent has not paid anything by way of maintenance to the applicant or to their minor son till date. It is, however, submitted that the respondent had offered to pay the same. However, this Court is VIJAY ASIJA 2026.05.25 20.31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document unable to see that as to what forbids the respondent from making any payment towards maintenance to the applic However, learned counsel for the respondent submits that the present Transfer Application filed by the respondent at Family Colurt, Patiala to the Court at Ludhiana 5. case file. 6. well established. In this regard, judgment of the Hon’ble rendered in Live Law (SC) 627 Court has held as under: Transfer Application No.1719 of 2025 (O & M) unable to see that as to what forbids the respondent from making any payment towards maintenance to the applic However, learned counsel for the respondent submits that the present Application for transfer the petition under Section 9 of the Act, filed by the respondent at Family Colurt, Patiala to the Court at has been filed just to harass the respondent I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case file. 6. The legal position in such like cases as the present one, is well established. In this regard, judgment of the Hon’ble 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 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 soun 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 protectiv 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 a 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 1719 of 2025 (O & M) 3 unable to see that as to what forbids the respondent from making any payment towards maintenance to the applicant or the minor child. However, learned counsel for the respondent submits that the present for transfer the petition under Section 9 of the Act, filed by the respondent at Family Colurt, Patiala to the Court at ed just to harass the respondent-husband. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the The legal position in such like cases as the present one, is well established. In this regard, judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court N.C.V. Aishwarya vs A.S. Saravana Karthik Sha,” 2022 , is most relevant wherein the Hon’ble Supreme “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 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 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 desirable that they should be tried together by the VIJAY ASIJA 2026.05.25 20.31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 7. “Sumita Singh vs Kumar Sanjay”, 2002 SC 396 Pardeshivs Kishor Babulal Pardeshi”, 2005(12) SCC 237 the Hon’bl transfer application, the Courts are required to give more weightage and consideration to the convenience of the female litigants and transfer of legal proceedings from one Court to another should ordin 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 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, the custody of the minor child, economic condition of the wife, her physical health and 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 litig travelling expenses. 9. i.e. Sumita Singh’s (supra) and Supreme Court, this Court d petition, subject to the following conditions: Transfer Application No.1719 of 2025 (O & M) same Judge so as to avoid multiplicity in same issues and conflict of decisions.” Further reliance can be placed upon the judgments in “Sumita Singh vs Kumar Sanjay”, 2002 SC 396 Pardeshivs Kishor Babulal Pardeshi”, 2005(12) SCC 237 the Hon’ble Supreme Court has observed that “while deciding the transfer application, the Courts are required to give more weightage and consideration to the convenience of the female litigants and transfer of legal proceedings from one Court to another should ordin 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 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, 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, connectivity of the place to and fro from her place of residence as well as bearing of the litig travelling expenses. In view of the facts mentioned above and the judgments 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: 1719 of 2025 (O & M) 4 same Judge so as to avoid multiplicity in trial of the same issues and conflict of decisions.” 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 e Supreme Court has observed that “while deciding the transfer application, the Courts are required to give more 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 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, at the instance 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 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 In view of the facts mentioned above and the judgments Rajani Kishor Pardeshi’s case case (supra) passed by the Hon’ble eems it appropriate to allow the present petition, subject to the following conditions:- VIJAY ASIJA 2026.05.25 20.31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 8. to refer the exploring the possibility of some amicable settlement between the parties. 9. the parties, will accommodate them with one date in one calendar month. 11. Bench of this Court in Talwar; TA No. 1322 of 2022, Jaswinder Kaur v Gurvinderjeet Singh; and May 22, 202 Vijay Asija Whether speaking/reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No Transfer Application No.1719 of 2025 (O & M) a) The petition filed by respondent husband under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act,1955, bearing No. DMS/1223/2025 titled as ‘ Supreet Kaur’, pending is transferred to a Court of competent jurisdiction at Ludhiana. b) The learned District Judge, Patiala is directed to transfer complete record pertaining to the aforesaid case to District Judge, Ludhiana. c) The parties are directed to appear before the District & Sessions Judge, Ludhiana on d) The District Judge, Ludhiana will assign the said petition to the Court of competent jurisdiction. The concerned Court at Ludhiana 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 calendar I am supported by the decisions rendered by a Co Bench of this Court in TA No. 1315/2022, Rohini Arora v Nitin Talwar; TA No. 1322 of 2022, Jaswinder Kaur v Gurvinderjeet ; and TA No. 1323 of 2022, Usha Rani v Karmajit Singh. Disposed of. Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of. , 2026 Vijay Asija Whether speaking/reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No 1719 of 2025 (O & M) 5 The petition filed by respondent husband under of Hindu Marriage Act,1955, bearing No. titled as ‘Kartik Gautam vs. ’, pending in the Family Court, Patiala is transferred to a Court of competent jurisdiction at The learned District Judge, Patiala is directed to transfer complete record pertaining to the aforesaid case to District Judge, Ludhiana. directed to appear before the District & Sessions Judge, Ludhiana on 23.6.2026. The District Judge, Ludhiana will assign the said petition to the Court of competent jurisdiction. The concerned Court at Ludhiana will make all endeavour 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 calendar I am supported by the decisions rendered by a Co-ordinate TA No. 1315/2022, Rohini Arora v Nitin Talwar; TA No. 1322 of 2022, Jaswinder Kaur v Gurvinderjeet TA No. 1323 of 2022, Usha Rani v Karmajit Singh. Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of. ( NIDHI GUPTA ) JUDGE VIJAY ASIJA 2026.05.25 20.31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document