IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA 158 Sweety Balinder Singh CORAM: Present:- NIDHI GUPTA J. (Oral) 1. wife is for transfer of the petition Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act,1955 (for short ‘the Act’) bearing No.HMA/417/2025 titled as “Balinder Singh vs. Sweety” (Annexure P Court of competent jurisdiction at Tohana, District Fatehabad (Haryana). 2. i) ii) Transfer Application No.401 of 2026 (O & M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Transfer Application Date of decision :-21.05.2026 Versus Balinder Singh CORAM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Ms. Aditi Sharma, Advocate for Mr. Gaurav Grover, Advocate for the applicant. Ms. Surjit Kaur, Advocate with Mr. Anil Bansal, Advocate for the respondent. NIDHI GUPTA J. (Oral) Prayer in this Transfer Application is for transfer of the petition filed by respondent Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act,1955 (for short ‘the Act’) bearing No.HMA/417/2025 titled as “Balinder Singh vs. Sweety” exure P-1) pending in the Family Court, Sangrur (Punjab) to a Court of competent jurisdiction at Tohana, District Fatehabad (Haryana). Learned counsel for the applicant has contended : That the parties were married on Hindu rites and rituals. That a male child was born out of this wedlock on 27.7.2017, who is in the care and custody of the applicant. of 2026 (O & M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Transfer Application No.401 of 2026 (O & M) .05.2026 …..Applicant …..Respondent HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Ms. Aditi Sharma, Advocate for Gaurav Grover, Advocate Ms. Surjit Kaur, Advocate with Mr. Anil Bansal, Advocate for the respondent. Transfer Application filed by applicant- filed by respondent-husband under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act,1955 (for short ‘the Act’) bearing No.HMA/417/2025 titled as “Balinder Singh vs. Sweety” 1) pending in the Family Court, Sangrur (Punjab) to a Court of competent jurisdiction at Tohana, District Fatehabad Learned counsel for the applicant has contended :- the parties were married on 23.2.2015 according to That a male child was born out of this wedlock on 27.7.2017, who is in the care and custody of the VIJAY ASIJA 2026.05.25 20.48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document iii) 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 Court of competent jurisdiction at Sangrur (Punjab) on the ground Transfer Application No.401 of 2026 (O & M) iii) That the applicant-wife is living separately from the respondent-husband and living with her parents at mercy at Tohana, District Fatehabad (Haryana). iv) That the applicant is unemployed, having no source of income and totally dependent upon her parents and the respondent-husband is not paying anything to her towards maintenance. That the proceedings arising out of petitions : (a) under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005; (b) FIR No.0007 dated 03.1.2026, filed by the applicant-wife, are pending in the Courts having competent jurisdiction at Tohana, District Fatehabad (Haryana). vi) That the distance between place of residence of the applicant-wife i.e. Tohana, District Fatehabad (Haryana) and the place of proceedings under Section Act, filed by the respondent- Family Court, Sangrur (Punjab), is about 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 Sangrur (Punjab). 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 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 nder Section 13 of the Act, filed by the respondent Court of competent jurisdiction at Sangrur (Punjab) on the ground of 2026 (O & M) 2 wife is living separately from the husband and living with her parents at their mercy at Tohana, District Fatehabad (Haryana). That the applicant is unemployed, having no source of income and totally dependent upon her parents and the husband is not paying anything to her dings arising out of petitions :- under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005; FIR No.0007 dated 03.1.2026, wife, are pending in the Courts having competent jurisdiction at Tohana, District That the distance between place of residence of the wife i.e. Tohana, District Fatehabad (Haryana) and the place of proceedings under Section 13 of the -husband, pending before the (Punjab), is about 79 kilometers That there is no proficient male member in the family of the applicant, who can accompany her to the Court of proceedings at Sangrur (Punjab). 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 the Court of competent jurisdiction at Sangrur (Punjab) on the ground VIJAY ASIJA 2026.05.25 20.48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document that the 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 appli Transfer Application No.401 of 2026 (O & M) that the 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 cases as the present one, 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 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 thei 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 prev 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 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 of 2026 (O & M) 3 that the present Transfer Application has been filed just to harass the el 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 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 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 urther 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 cation, 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 female litigants and transfer of legal proceedings from one Court to another should ordinarily be allowed, taking into consideration their convenience and th litigants under undue hardships.” 8. aforesaid principle of law. Accordingly, it is well settled that while considering the transfer of a matrimonial d 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 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. 9. i.e. Sumita Singh’s (supra) and Supreme Court, this Court deems it appropriate to allow the present petition, subject to the fo Transfer Application No.401 of 2026 (O & M) 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 d 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 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 of Hindu Marriage Act,1955, bearing No. HMA/417/2025 titled as ‘ Sweety’, pending in the Family Court, Sangrur (Punjab) is transferred to a Court of compete jurisdiction at Tohana, District Fatehabad (Haryana). of 2026 (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 e Courts should desist from putting female 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 health and earning capacity of the husband and most 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. tioned 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 llowing conditions:- The petition filed by respondent husband under of Hindu Marriage Act,1955, bearing titled as ‘Balinder Singh vs. ’, pending in the Family Court, Sangrur (Punjab) is transferred to a Court of competent jurisdiction at Tohana, District Fatehabad VIJAY ASIJA 2026.05.25 20.48 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 8. all endeavour to refer the case before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre for exploring the possibility of some amicable settlement between the parties. 9. between the parties, will accommoda 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.401 of 2026 (O & M) b) The learned District Judge, directed to transfer complete the aforesaid case to District Judge, (Haryana). c) The parties are directed to appea District & Sessions Judge on 24.6.2026. d) The District Judge, assign the said petition to the Court of competent jurisdiction. The concerned Court at Fatehabad (Haryana) all 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 Karmajit Singh. Disposed of. Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of. , 2026 Whether speaking/reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No of 2026 (O & M) 5 District Judge, Sangrur (Punjab) is complete record pertaining to the aforesaid case to District Judge, Fatehabad The parties are directed to appear before the District & Sessions Judge, Fatehabad (Haryana) The District Judge, Fatehabad (Haryana) will assign the said petition to the Court of competent Fatehabad (Haryana) will make all endeavour to refer the case before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre for exploring the possibility of some amicable settlement The Court concerned, where the litigation pending te 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