IN T 144 Neha Gupt Rohit Gupt CORAM: Present:- NIDHI GU CM-9871- P-6 to typed/certifi TA-308-202 1. applicant-w (Annexure P learned Prin of jurisdictio 2. was married their wedloc TA-308-2024 (O & M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA AT CHANDIGAR CM-9871-CII-2026 in/an Transfer Application No Date of decision :-12.05 Gupta Versus Gupta AM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDH Mr. Nakul Sharma, Advocate for the applicant. Mr. Amit Arora, Advocate for the respondent. I GUPTA J. (Oral) -CII-2026 Prayer in this application is for to P-15 and for exempti /certified/translated/photocopy of Annex Allowed as prayed for. 2024 (O & M) The present transfer applicati wife seeking transfer of the c exure P-1) titled as “Rohit Gupta vs. Ne d Principal Judge, Family Court, Tarn T isdiction at Family Court, Ludhiana or its Learned counsel for the applica arried to the respondent on 06.9.2008. O wedlock on 24.10.2013, who is presentl 1 UNJAB AND HARYANA IGARH 6 in/and ion No.308 of 2024 (O & M) .05.2026 …..Applicant …..Respondent NIDHI GUPTA is for placing on record Annexures emption from filing true Annexures P-6 to P-15. plication has been filed by the the case bearing HMA/34/2024 vs. Neha Gupta” from the Court of Tarn Taran to the competent Court or its camp at Khanna. pplicant submits that the applicant 008. One daughter was born out of resently in the care and custody of VIJAY ASIJA 2026.05.15 08.34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document the applican Australia, w Australia, th by the resp home loan, has stopped the respond instant petit called ‘the A 3. petition und through his respondent also appear Power of A residing in A of the appli the distance and the Fam expired due is unable to 4. installments (Annexure P at Australia application respondent, applicant ha TA-308-2024 (O & M) plicant. In 2018 the parties alongwith alia, where, matrimonial dispute aros alia, the applicant had filed the Child S e respondent. The applicant and the r loan, which was also being paid by the topped paying the loan installments. Ul spondent came to India and in January t petition under Section 13 of the Hind ‘the Act’). Learned counsel for the appl on under Section 13 of the Act has b gh his Power of Attorney holder i.e ndent himself is residing and working in ppearing before the learned Family Co r of Attorney holder i.e. her father, a ng in Australia alongwith her daughter. applicant is suffering from cancer and stance of 182 kilometers between Ludhi e Family Court at Tarn Taran. The mo ed due to cancer. As such, father of the a ble to handle the litigation at Family Cou It is submitted that as the appl lments of the home loan alone, she exure P-12) before the Family Court at A stralia, so that the applicant may go ation the notice was issued to the ndent, vide e-mail (Annexure P-8) respo ant had also filed a petition under Sec 2 gwith their daughter had moved to arose between the parties. In hild Support, which was not given the respondent had taken a joint by the applicant as the respondent ts. Ultimately, in December 2023, anuary 2024, he promptly filed the e Hindu Marriage Act (hereinafter applicant submits that the said has been filed by the respondent er i.e. his brother-in-law. The ing in Bangalore. The applicant is ily Court, Tarn Taran through her ther, as the applicant is presently hter. It is submitted that the father er and therefore is unable to travel Ludhiana, where he used to reside; he mother of the applicant had also f the applicant lives by himself and ily Court Tarn Taran. e applicant was unable to pay the , she had moved an application rt at Australia for selling the house ay got some funds. In the said o the respondent, to which the responded. It is submitted that the er Section 125 Cr.P.C. at Khanna, VIJAY ASIJA 2026.05.15 08.34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document which is no that keeping the case be Family Cou Khanna. 5. submissions previously which was Divisional J Section 27. to be seen, support, lea passed by Attorney Sh (Civil) 198 6. 7. such like c judgment of A.S. Sarav Hon’ble Sup TA-308-2024 (O & M) is now pending adjudication for 01.6.20 eeping in view the above facts, the prese ase bearing HMA/34/2024 (Annexure P ly Court, Tarn Taran to the Family Cou Per contra learned counsel for issions of the applicant and submitt ously filed a petition under the Domes was dismissed vide order dated 15.1 ional Judicial Magistrate, Khanna on the n 27. It is established position in law th seen, however, convenience of his fath rt, learned counsel for the respondent h d by this Court in Rubalpreet Kaur y Sh. Jobanpreet Singh vs. Harbark 198. I have heard learned counsel for Besides the facts as noticed here like cases as the present one, is well ent of the Hon’ble Supreme Court rende Saravana Karthik Sha,” 2022 Live L ble Supreme Court has held as under:- “9. The cardinal principle for ex section 24 of the Code of Civil ends of justice should demand t appeal or other proceeding. In wherever Courts are called upo of transfer, the Courts have to t the economic soundness of both strata of the spouses and thei their standard of life prior 3 01.6.2026. It is accordingly prayed present application be allowed and xure P-1) be transferred from the ly Court, Ludhiana or its camp at el for the respondent opposes the ubmitted that the applicant had omestic Violence Act at Khanna, d 15.11.2025 by the learned Sub on the grounds of jurisdiction under law that convenience of the wife is is father is of no consequence. In dent has relies upon the judgment aur through Special Power of barkamaljot Singh 2019(4) RCR sel for the parties. d hereinabove, the legal position in s well established. In this regard, t rendered in N.C.V. Aishwarya vs Live Law (SC) 627, wherein the for exercise of power under f Civil Procedure is that the and the transfer of the suit, ng. In matrimonial matters, d upon to consider the plea ve to take into consideration f both the parties, the social d their behavioural pattern, rior to the marriage and VIJAY ASIJA 2026.05.15 08.34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 8. “Sumita Si Pardeshivs Hon’ble Su application, consideratio legal procee taking into from putting 9. aforesaid p considering the wife, th custody of health and convenience male memb place of resi expenses. TA-308-2024 (O & M) subsequent thereto and the circ parties in eking out their livelih protective umbrella they are see to life. Given the prevailing soc in the Indian society, genera convenience which must b considering transfer. 10. Further, when two or m pending in different Courts betw which raise common question when the decisions in the cases is desirable that they should be same Judge so as to avoid mul same issues and conflict of decis Further reliance can be place ita Singh vs Kumar Sanjay”, 2002 S eshivs Kishor Babulal Pardeshi”, 2005 ble Supreme Court has observed that “ ation, the Courts are required to deration to the convenience of the fem proceedings from one Court to another s into consideration their convenience a putting female litigants under undue hard Even this Court in number said principle of law. Accordingly, it dering the transfer of a matrimonial dis ife, the Court is to consider the family dy of the minor child, economic conditi and earning capacity of the husban nience of the wife i.e. she cannot travel member of her family, connectivity of t of residence as well as bearing of the liti ses. 4 e circumstances of both the livelihood and under whose are seeking their sustenance ing socioeconomic paradigm generally, it is the wife's st be looked at while or more proceedings are ts between the same parties estion of fact and law, and cases are interdependent, it uld be tried together by the d multiplicity in trial of the f decisions.” placed upon the judgments in 002 SC 396 and “Rajani Kishor , 2005(12) SCC 237, wherein the that “while deciding the transfer to give more weightage and e female litigants and transfer of other should ordinarily be allowed, ence and the Courts should desist e hardships.” ber of cases has followed the gly, it is well settled that while ial dispute/case, at the instance of family condition of the wife, the condition of the wife, her physical husband and most important the travel alone without assistance of a ty of the place to and fro from her the litigation charges and travelling VIJAY ASIJA 2026.05.15 08.34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 10. fact that iss staying furth wife will ha and in case, bear the lit Singh’s cas Aishwarya’ Court deem following co 11. refer the ca the possibili 12. the parties, w 13. Bench of th TA-308-2024 (O & M) After going through the entire t issuance of notice to the responde g further proceedings before the trial Co will have to bear the litigation expenses case, notice of motion is issued, even th the litigation expenses and in view of case (supra), Rajani Kishor Pardesh arya’s case (supra) passed by the H deems it appropriate to allow the pre ing conditions:- a) The petition filed by Section 13 of Act, bearing “Rohit Gupta vs. Neha G of Principal Judge, Fam transferred to a Court o Ludhiana. b) The ld. b) The ld. District Judge, transfer complete record case to District Judge, Lu c) The parties are directed to Sessions Judge, Ludhiana d) The District Judge, Lud petition to the Court of co The concerned Court at Ludhian case before the Mediation and Conc ssibility of some amicable settlement be The Court concerned, where the rties, will accommodate them with one d I am supported by the decision h of this Court in TA No. 1315/2022, Ro 5 entire paper-book, considering the pondent has the consequences of rial Court, otherwise the petitioner- penses and transportation expenses even the respondent-husband has to iew of the judgments i.e. Sumita ardeshi’s case (supra) and N.C.V. the Hon’ble Supreme Court, this he present petition, subject to the by respondent husband under bearing No. HMA/34/2024 titled as eha Gupta”, pending in the Court Family Court, Tarn Taran is ourt of competent jurisdiction at udge, Tarn Taran is directed to record pertaining to the aforesaid ge, Ludhiana. cted to appear before the District & dhiana on 15.6.2026. e, Ludhiana will assign the said t of competent jurisdiction. udhiana will make all endeavour to Conciliation Centre for exploring ent between the parties. re the litigation is pending between one date in one calendar month. cisions rendered by a Co-ordinate 22, Rohini Arora v Nitin Talwar; VIJAY ASIJA 2026.05.15 08.34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document TA No. 132 No. 1323 of 14. the parties b that a copy mail. The pa May 12, 202 Vijay Asija Whether spe Whether Rep TA-308-2024 (O & M) o. 1322 of 2022, Jaswinder Kaur v Gu 323 of 2022, Usha Rani v Karmajit Sin As already noticed above, in or arties before the District Judge, Ludhian copy of this order be sent to the District The parties are directed to ensure their Disposed of. Pending application(s), if any, st , 2026 Asija er speaking/reasoned Yes / No er Reportable Yes / No 6 r v Gurvinderjeet Singh; and TA jit Singh. , in order to ensure appearance of dhiana on 15.6.2026, it is directed istrict Judges concerned through e- appearance accordingly. any, stands disposed of. ( NIDHI GUPTA ) JUDGE VIJAY ASIJA 2026.05.15 08.34 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document