IN T 137 Jaspreet K Harmandee CORAM: Present:- NIDHI GU 1. transfer of t the Hindu No.HMA/27 Prabhjot Ka Principal Ju jurisdiction 2. Transfer Application No.1053 of 202 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA AT CHANDIGAR Transfer Application No Date of decision :-19.05. eet Kaur Versus andeep Singh AM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDH None for the applicant. Mr. Anuj Kumar Sharma, Advoc for the respondent. I GUPTA J. (Oral) Prayer in the present petition file er of the petition filed by the respondent Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for MA/273/2025 titled as “Harmandeep jot Kaur” (Annexure P-1), pending befo ipal Judge, Family Court, Chandigarh iction at Barnala. The applicant in this Transfer Ap i) The marriage between th 03.05.2022 according to ii) No child was born out of iii) Owing to matrimonial d been residing separately since 16.04.2024 and is parents in Village Moom iv) The applicant-wife independent source o 2025 (O & M) 1 UNJAB AND HARYANA IGARH No.1053 of 2025 (O & M) 19.05.2026 …..Applicant …..Respondent NIDHI GUPTA Advocate on filed by the applicant-wife is for ndent-husband under Section 13 of (for short, ‘the Act’) bearing deep Singh vs. Jaspreet Kaur @ g before the Court of learned Addl. digarh, to a Court of competent fer Application has submitted that:- een the parties was solemnized on ing to Sikh rites and ceremonies. out of the wedlock. nial discord, the applicant-wife has rately from the respondent-husband and is presently residing with her Moom, District Barnala. ife is unemployed, has no rce of income and is entirely VIJAY ASIJA 2026.05.22 18.58 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 3. the petition, 4. respondent application. facts from t account stat to the respo in a Visa C she is residi 5. and workin Transfer Ap Transfer Application No.1053 of 202 dependent upon her par further submitted that th paying any amount towa v) Proceedings arising out 144 of the Bharatiya Na bearing No.MNT/91/202 are pending before the co vi) The distance between Barnala, where the a residing, and Chandigar Section 13 of the Act 160 kilometers one sid applicant-wife to underta financial constraints. vii) It is also contended t member in the family applicant-wife to Chand of hearing. On the aforesaid grounds, prayer tition, as detailed hereinabove. Per contra, learned counsel a ndent-husband has vehemently opp ation. It is submitted that the applicant from this Court. Attention of the Court nt statement of the applicant-wife (Ann respondent, reflects that the applicant- isa Consultancy firm and as per her ba residing at “SCF-13, Top Floor, Phase- It is, thus, contended that the app orking at Mohali and not at Barnala, fer Application. It has further been argue 2025 (O & M) 2 er parents for her sustenance. It is that the respondent-husband is not t towards her maintenance. g out of a petition under Section iya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 91/2025 filed by the applicant-wife the competent Court at Barnala. etween Village Moom, District the applicant-wife claims to be ndigarh, where the petition under Act is pending, is approximately ne side and it is difficult for the undertake such travel on account of ded that there is no adult male family who can accompany the Chandigarh on each and every date prayer has been made for transfer of nsel appearing on behalf of the opposed the present transfer licant-wife has concealed material Court has been drawn to the bank (Annexure R-3), which, according -wife is working as a freelancer her bank statement (Annexure R-3) -5, SAS Nagar (Mohali)”. he applicant-wife is in fact residing ala, as projected in the present n argued that no documentary proof VIJAY ASIJA 2026.05.22 18.58 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document has been pl at Village M 6. complaint in summons u Section 13 application 7. the applica controvertin statement/re purpose on 8. have carefu record. 9. facie indica complete ca the applica Mohali and Despite spe regard, the been filed n 10. from the Co material fac disentitles a Transfer Application No.1053 of 202 een placed on record by the applicant- lage Moom, District Barnala. Learned counsel for the responde laint initiated by the applicant-wife was ons upon her in the petition filed by th n 13 of the Act. It is, therefore, pray n deserves dismissal. It is pertinent to notice that today pplicant-wife has appeared nor any overting the specific assertions raised by ent/reply, despite opportunity having se on the previous date of hearing i.e. 30 I have heard learned counsel for carefully perused the paper-book as wel A perusal of the material produ indicates that the applicant-wife has no lete candour. The record relied upon by pplicant-wife has been associated wit li and has disclosed the Mohali addres ite specific pleadings having been raise d, the same have remained unrebutted, filed nor any explanation has been furnis It is well settled that a litigant the Court must approach the Court with ial facts truthfully. Suppression or co titles a party from seeking equitable relie 2025 (O & M) 3 -wife to establish her residence pondent has also submitted that the fe was lodged only after service of by the respondent-husband under e, prayed that the present transfer today, neither learned counsel for r any rejoinder has been filed sed by the respondent in the written having been sought for the said i.e. 30.04.2026. sel for the respondent-husband and as well as the documents placed on produced by the respondent prima has not approached this Court with pon by the respondent reflects that d with a consultancy concern at address in her banking documents. n raised by the respondent in this utted, as neither any rejoinder has furnished by the applicant-wife. itigant seeking discretionary relief rt with clean hands and disclose all or concealment of material facts e relief. VIJAY ASIJA 2026.05.22 18.58 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 11. Court in Sw Law Finder 12. Sheveta Se Doc ID # 2 Haryana) : Tarun Nag 2291311. 13. in cases of the wife. Ho Supreme Co such case is Hon’ble Sup application may also circumstanc behalf of th Transfer Application No.1053 of 202 In this situation, reference may b Swati Pathania v. Ritesh Pangasa, Finder Doc ID # 2126995, wherein it is “Transfer application seeking tr dismissed due to concealmen misstatements made by the petitio Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 Sectio Petitioner-wife seeking transfer o respondent-husband - Earlier tra on merits due to concealment application also dismissed as w application dismissed as petition making misstatements and mislea Same view has been taken by ta Sehgal v. Anuj Puri, (Punjab And D # 2726495; Swati Pathania v. Rite ana) : Law Finder Doc ID # 20273 n Nagpal, (Punjab And Haryana) : This Court is also well aware th es of transfer emanating from matrimon ife. However, in certain cases similar to t me Court, as well as this Court have ref case is: (2006) 9 SCC 197 ‘Anindita D ble Supreme Court under similar circums on seeking transfer of petition filed also be made to two cases of this stances this Court had dismissed tra f of the wife. These are: TA No. 126 2025 (O & M) 4 may be made to judgment of this ngasa, (Punjab And Haryana) : n it is held that:- g transfer of matrimonial case lment of material facts and etitioner-wife. ection 13 Transfer application - fer of matrimonial case filed by r transfer application dismissed ent of material facts - Review s withdrawn - Present transfer titioner found to be habitual in isleading the Court.” en by this Court in Sheveta @ b And Haryana) : Law Finder . Ritesh Pangasa, (Punjab And 2027329; and Richa Nagpal v. ana) : Law Finder Doc ID # are that the preponderance of law trimonial disputes is in favour of to the present one, the Hon’ble ve refused relief to the wife. One dita Das Vs. Srijit Das’ wherein ircumstances dismissed the wife’s filed by the husband. Reference f this Court where, in similar ed transfer applications filed on . 126 of 2018 ‘Smt. Akhwinder VIJAY ASIJA 2026.05.22 18.58 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Kaur Vs. S Manisha vs 14. with the un persuades th the applican 15. application, 16. dismissed. May 19, 202 Vijay Asija Whether spe Whether Rep Transfer Application No.1053 of 202 Vs. Sh. Gurpreet Singh’; and TA No sha vs. Amarveer Yadav’. In the present case, the conduct o the unrebutted material placed on record ades this Court not to exercise discretio plicant-wife. Consequently, finding no mer cation, the same is hereby dismissed. Pending miscellaneous applicati ssed. , 2026 Asija er speaking/reasoned Yes / No er Reportable Yes / No 2025 (O & M) 5 A No. 299 of 2019 ‘Nisha alias duct of the applicant-wife, coupled record by the respondent-husband, cretionary jurisdiction in favour of o merit in the present transfer plications, if any, shall also stand ( NIDHI GUPTA ) JUDGE VIJAY ASIJA 2026.05.22 18.58 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document