IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA 145 Dr. Ruchika Kumari Dr. Ashutosh Kayasth CORAM: Present:- NIDHI GUPTA J. (Oral) The present transfer application has been filed seeking transfer of the petition instituted by the respondent under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short, “the Act”), bearing No. HMA/734/2024 titled as “Dr. Ashutosh Kayasth vs. Ruchika Kumari” (Annexure P learned Family Court, Sirsa, to a Court of competent jurisdiction at Ambala. 2. inter alia, contended as under: Transfer Application No.1424 of 2024 (O & M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Transfer Application Date of decision :-21.05.2026 Dr. Ruchika Kumari Versus Ashutosh Kayasth CORAM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Mr. Kunal Mulwani, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. Kushager Goyal, Advocate for the respondent. NIDHI GUPTA J. (Oral) The present transfer application has been filed seeking transfer of the petition instituted by the respondent under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short, “the Act”), bearing No. HMA/734/2024 titled as “Dr. Ashutosh Kayasth vs. Ruchika Kumari” (Annexure P-1), presently pending before the learned Family Court, Sirsa, to a Court of competent jurisdiction at Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant has, inter alia, contended as under:- i) That the marriage between the parties was solemnized on 25.04.2021 according to Hindu rites and ceremonies. 1424 of 2024 (O & M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Transfer Application No.1424 of 2024 (O & M) .05.2026 …..Applicant …..Respondent HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Kunal Mulwani, Advocate Mr. Kushager Goyal, Advocate The present transfer application has been filed by the applicant-wife seeking transfer of the petition instituted by the respondent-husband under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short, “the Act”), bearing No. HMA/734/2024 titled as “Dr. Ashutosh Kayasth presently pending before the learned Family Court, Sirsa, to a Court of competent jurisdiction at Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant has, That the marriage between the parties was solemnized on 25.04.2021 according to Hindu VIJAY ASIJA 2026.05.25 20.48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Transfer Application No.1424 of 2024 (O & M) ii) That a female child was born out of the wedlock on 23.03.2022, who is suffering from Autism Spectrum Disorder and is presently in the care and custody of the applicant’s parents at Amba It is submitted that the applicant, despite being posted at Rohtak, frequently travels to Ambala to look after the child and attend to her special needs. iii) That owing to matrimonial discord, the applicant wife is living separately from the responde husband. iv) That the applicant is presently serving as Assistant Professor in the Department of Surgery at PGIMS, Rohtak, whereas the respondent is posted as a Medical Specialist at CHC, Dharchula, District Pithoragarh, Uttarakhand. It is submitted that the respondent had been pressurizing the applicant to either resign from her employment and shift to Pithoragarh or reside at Sirsa with his family members. It is further submitted that the respondent is not paying any maintenance either to the applican minor daughter. v) That proceedings arising out of the following petitions instituted by the applicant already pending before the competent Courts at Ambala:- (a) A petition under Section 144 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), bearing No. MNT/125/4564/2024 filed on 19.09.2024; and (b) A maintenance petiti MNT/125/341/2024 1424 of 2024 (O & M) 2 That a female child was born out of the wedlock on 23.03.2022, who is suffering from Autism Spectrum Disorder and is presently in the care and custody of the applicant’s parents at Ambala. It is submitted that the applicant, despite being posted at Rohtak, frequently travels to Ambala to look after the child and attend to her special That owing to matrimonial discord, the applicant- wife is living separately from the respondent- That the applicant is presently serving as Assistant Professor in the Department of Surgery at PGIMS, Rohtak, whereas the respondent is posted as a Medical Specialist at CHC, Dharchula, District Pithoragarh, Uttarakhand. It is at the respondent had been pressurizing the applicant to either resign from her employment and shift to Pithoragarh or reside at Sirsa with his family members. It is further submitted that the respondent is not paying any maintenance either to the applicant or to the That proceedings arising out of the following petitions instituted by the applicant-wife are already pending before the competent Courts at A petition under Section 144 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), bearing No. MNT/125/4564/2024 filed on 19.09.2024; and maintenance petition bearing No. MNT/125/341/2024 VIJAY ASIJA 2026.05.25 20.48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 3. of the petition, as detailed in paragraph No. 1 above. 4. respondent has opposed the submissions advanced on behalf of the applicant. It is contended that the applicant is a regular Government employee serving as Assistant Professor in the Department of Surgery at PGIMS, Rohtak and is financially independent. residing with the applicant at Rohtak but with the applicant’s parents at Ambala. Learned counsel has drawn attention to paragraph 17(iii) of the transfer application to contend that, as per the applicant’s averments, she frequently travels from Rohtak to Ambala to visit the child and, therefore, there should be no impediment for her to travel to Sirsa to attend the Court proceedings. respondent fair Transfer Application No.1424 of 2024 (O & M) vi) That the distance between Ambala, where the applicant and the minor child are residing, and Sirsa, where the petition under Sectio Act is pending, is approximately 241 kilometres one way. vii) That owing to the applicant’s employment at Rohtak and the medical condition of the minor child, she is already constrained to travel frequently between Rohtak and Ambala and, therefore, it would cause considerable hardship to attend proceedings at Sirsa. On the aforesaid grounds, the applicant prays for transfer of the petition, as detailed in paragraph No. 1 above. Per contra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the ndent has opposed the submissions advanced on behalf of the applicant. It is contended that the applicant is a regular Government employee serving as Assistant Professor in the Department of Surgery at PGIMS, Rohtak and is financially independent. It is further submitted that the minor daughter is not residing with the applicant at Rohtak but with the applicant’s parents at Ambala. Learned counsel has drawn attention to paragraph 17(iii) of the transfer application to contend that, as per the applicant’s averments, she frequently travels from Rohtak to Ambala to visit the child and, therefore, there should be no impediment for her to travel to Sirsa to attend the Court proceedings. However, upon a Court query, learned counsel for the respondent fairly submits that he has no instructions as to whether the 1424 of 2024 (O & M) 3 That the distance between Ambala, where the applicant and the minor child are residing, and Sirsa, where the petition under Section 9 of the Act is pending, is approximately 241 kilometres That owing to the applicant’s employment at Rohtak and the medical condition of the minor child, she is already constrained to travel frequently between Rohtak and Ambala and, ore, it would cause considerable hardship to attend proceedings at Sirsa. On the aforesaid grounds, the applicant prays for transfer of the petition, as detailed in paragraph No. 1 above. , learned counsel appearing on behalf of the ndent has opposed the submissions advanced on behalf of the applicant. It is contended that the applicant is a regular Government employee serving as Assistant Professor in the Department of Surgery at PGIMS, Rohtak and is financially independent. further submitted that the minor daughter is not residing with the applicant at Rohtak but with the applicant’s parents at Ambala. Learned counsel has drawn attention to paragraph 17(iii) of the transfer application to contend that, as per the applicant’s own averments, she frequently travels from Rohtak to Ambala to visit the child and, therefore, there should be no impediment for her to travel to However, upon a Court query, learned counsel for the ly submits that he has no instructions as to whether the VIJAY ASIJA 2026.05.25 20.48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document respondent is paying any maintenance towards the upkeep of the minor child. has been filed only with a view to harass the 5. perused the paper 6. is well established. In this regard, judgment of t 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 Transfer Application No.1424 of 2024 (O & M) respondent is paying any maintenance towards the upkeep of the minor child. It is lastly contended that the present transfer application has been filed only with a view to harass the I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have perused the paper-book with their able assistance. The legal position in such like cases as the present one, is well established. In this regard, judgment of t 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 ec 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 pr 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 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 1424 of 2024 (O & M) 4 respondent is paying any maintenance towards the upkeep of the It is lastly contended that the present transfer application has been filed only with a view to harass the respondent-husband. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have book with their able assistance. 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 e 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 e 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 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 iplicity 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, VIJAY ASIJA 2026.05.25 20.48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document wherein 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.” 8. aforesaid principle of law. 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, connectivity of the place to and fro from her place of residence as well as be the litigation charges and travelling expenses. 9. present case, this Court finds that the minor daughter born out of the wedlock is suffering from Autism Spectrum Disorder and is presently residing with the applicant’s parents at Ambala. The applicant, despite her employment at Rohtak, is required to frequently travel to Ambala to attend to the needs and welfare of the child. 10. applicant under the maintenance provisions are already pending Transfer Application No.1424 of 2024 (O & M) 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 hould 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, the custody of the minor child, economic condition of the wife, her hysical 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 be the litigation charges and travelling expenses. Applying the aforesaid principles to the facts of the present case, this Court finds that the minor daughter born out of the wedlock is suffering from Autism Spectrum Disorder and is presently siding with the applicant’s parents at Ambala. The applicant, despite her employment at Rohtak, is required to frequently travel to Ambala to attend to the needs and welfare of the child. It is also not disputed that proceedings initiated by the applicant under the maintenance provisions are already pending 1424 of 2024 (O & M) 5 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 hould ordinarily be allowed, taking into consideration their convenience and the Courts should desist from putting female Even this Court in number of cases has followed the 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 hysical 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. Applying the aforesaid principles to the facts of the present case, this Court finds that the minor daughter born out of the wedlock is suffering from Autism Spectrum Disorder and is presently siding with the applicant’s parents at Ambala. The applicant, despite her employment at Rohtak, is required to frequently travel to Ambala to attend to the needs and welfare of the child. It is also not disputed that proceedings initiated by the applicant under the maintenance provisions are already pending VIJAY ASIJA 2026.05.25 20.48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document before the competent Courts at Ambala. Therefore, consolidation of proceedings at one place would not only advance the cause of convenience but would also avoid multiplicity of litigation and conflicting decisions. would not by itself disentitle her from seeking transfer, particularly when the distance involved is substantial and the app simultaneously required to discharge her professional obligations as well as parental responsibilities towards a specially 11. 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.1424 of 2024 (O & M) before the competent Courts at Ambala. Therefore, consolidation of proceedings at one place would not only advance the cause of ence but would also avoid multiplicity of litigation and conflicting decisions. Merely because the applicant is gainfully employed would not by itself disentitle her from seeking transfer, particularly when the distance involved is substantial and the app simultaneously required to discharge her professional obligations as well as parental responsibilities towards a specially In view of the facts mentioned above and the Sumita Singh’s case (supra), Rajani (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 r Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act,1955, bearing No. HMA/734/2024 Kayasth vs. Ruchika Kumari Family Court, Sirsa is transferred to a Court of competent jurisdiction at Ambala. 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, Ambala petition to the Court of competent jurisdiction 1424 of 2024 (O & M) 6 before the competent Courts at Ambala. Therefore, consolidation of proceedings at one place would not only advance the cause of ence but would also avoid multiplicity of litigation and Merely because the applicant is gainfully employed would not by itself disentitle her from seeking transfer, particularly when the distance involved is substantial and the applicant is simultaneously required to discharge her professional obligations as well as parental responsibilities towards a specially-abled minor child. 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, bearing titled as ‘Dr. Ashutosbh Kayasth vs. Ruchika Kumari’, pending in the Family Court, Sirsa is transferred to a Court of competent jurisdiction at Ambala. District Judge, Sirsa is directed to record pertaining to the aforesaid case to District Judge, Ambala. The parties are directed to appear before the District & Sessions Judge, Ambala on 23.6.2026. Ambala will assign the said the Court of competent jurisdiction. VIJAY ASIJA 2026.05.25 20.48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 12. endeavour to refer the case before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre for exploring the possibility of some amicable settlement between the parties. 13. between the parties, will accommodate them with one date in one calendar month. 14. ordinate Bench of this Court in Nitin Talwar; TA N Gurvinderjeet Singh Karmajit Singh. 15. May 21, 202 Vijay Asija Whether speaking/reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No Transfer Application No.1424 of 2024 (O & M) The concerned Court at endeavour to refer the case before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre for exploring the possibility of some amicable settlement between the parties. 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, Rohini Arora v 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 speaking/reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No 1424 of 2024 (O & M) 7 The concerned Court at Ambala will make all endeavour to refer the case before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre for exploring the possibility of some amicable settlement oncerned, 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 o. 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