IN TH 108 Vijay Laks Raman Ku CORAM: Present:- NIDHI GU 1. is seeking t Section 13 Act’) for d dated 23.8 Lakshmi” Judge, Fa jurisdiction 2. i) ii) Transfer Application No.1428 of 202 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJA AT CHANDIGAR Transfer Application N Date of decision :-13.05 y Lakshmi Versus Kumar Sharma AM:- HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NI Mr. Kuljit Singh, Advocate fo Mr. Pardeep K. Bajaj, Advoca for the applicant. None for the respondent despi HI GUPTA J. (Oral) By way of present Transfer A eking transfer of Petition filed by the r on 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 195 ) for dissolution of marriage, bearing 23.8.2024 titled as “Raman Ku hmi” (Annexure P-1) from the Co e, Family Court, Ferozepur to th diction at Faridkot. Learned counsel for the applic that the parties were married Hindu rites and rituals. that one female (D.O.B. 01.3. (D.O.B. 10.6.2020) were born 2025 (O & M) 1 UNJAB AND HARYANA IGARH tion No.1428 of 2025 (O & M) .05.2026 …..Applicant …..Respondent E NIDHI GUPTA ate for dvocate t despite service. nsfer Application, the applicant y the respondent-husband under ct, 1955 (hereinafter called ‘the earing case No.DMC/439/2024 n Kumar Sharma vs. Vijay he Court of learned Principal to the Court of competent applicant has contended :- arried on 23.4.2014 according to . 01.3.2015) and one male child e born out of this wedlock, who VIJAY ASIJA 2026.05.15 08.47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document iii) iv) v) v) vi) 3. transfer of 4. respondent 5. 6. view that Transfer Application No.1428 of 202 have been in the care and c husband at Ferozepur. iii) that the applicant-wife is li respondent-husband since 02.7 old aged mother at her mer Faridkot. Father of the applica iv) that the petitioner is unemplo income and totally dependent respondent-husband, is not towards maintenance. The proceedings arising out o of the D.V. Act; as well as FI filed by the applicant-wif Department/Court having c Faridkot. That the distance between p applicant-wife i.e. Faridkot an under Section 13 of the Act husband, pending before the Court, Ferozepur, is about 36 that there is no proficient mal the petitioner, who can accom the Court of proceedings at Fe the applicant is old aged perso It is inter alia on these groun fer of the case, as detailed in para 1 ab Despite service, there is no r ndent-husband. I have heard learned counsel fo In view of the facts as enum that unlike the respondent, the ap 2025 (O & M) 2 and custody of the respondent- is living separately from the ce 02.7.2024 and living with her mercy at Kotkapura, District applicant used to live abroad. nemployed, having no source of endent upon her mother and the not paying anything to her out of petition under Section 12 l as FIR No.12 dated 24.1.2025., wife, are pending in the ing competent jurisdiction at een place of residence of the and the place of proceedings he Act, filed by the respondent- re the Principal Judge, Family ut 36 kilometers one side. nt male member in the family of accompany her to visit and attend Ferozepur because mother of person. grounds that applicant prays for ra 1 above. s no representation on behalf of nsel for the applicant. enumerated above, I am of the applicant-wife is admittedly VIJAY ASIJA 2026.05.15 08.47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document unemploye working an children an is single-ha both the ch provided to extenuating petitioner, position to as admitted Ferozepur 7. cases of tra the wife. H Hon’ble Su the wife. O 197 ‘Anind under simil transfer of also be m circumstan behalf of th Kaur Vs. S Manisha v Transfer Application No.1428 of 202 ployed, having no responsibilities as ing and simultaneously single-hande and fulfilling all his duties in that handedly responsible for the men the children as also has to ensure th ided to them as also their career and uating circumstances have been b ioner, on the basis of which it is sh ion to travel the relatively short distan mittedly, it is hardly a one-hour jou zepur, and that too, not daily but only o This Court is well aware of th of transfer emanating from matrimon ife. However, in certain similar cas ’ble Supreme Court, as well as this C ife. One such case which may be re ‘Anindita Das Vs. Srijit Das’ where r similar circumstances dismissed the fer of petition filed by the husband.Re be made to two cases of this mstances this Court had dismissed tra lf of the wife. These are: TA no. 126 r Vs. Sh. Gurpreet Singh; and TA N isha vs. Amarveer Yadav. 2025 (O & M) 3 ies as it is the respondent who is handedly looking after his both in that respect i.e. the respondent e mental and physical welfare of sure that all basic amenities are r and education. In contrast, no een brought to light by the t is shown that she is not in a t distance of about 36 kilometers ur journey between Faridkot to t only on the date of hearing. e of the preponderance of law in trimonial disputes is in favour of lar cases as the present one, the this Court have refused relief to be referred to is: (2006) 9 SCC wherein Hon’ble Supreme Court ed the wife’s application seeking Reference in this regard may this Court where, in similar sed transfer applications filed on 126 of 2018 Smt. Akhwinder TA No. 299 of 2019 Nisha alias VIJAY ASIJA 2026.05.15 08.47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 8. the present above, find May 13, 20 Vijay Asija Whether spea Whether Repo Transfer Application No.1428 of 202 Accordingly, in view of the resent case as noted above, as also the e, finding no merit in this petition, the Pending application(s) if any s , 2026 r speaking/reasoned Yes / No r Reportable Yes / No 2025 (O & M) 4 f the facts and circumstances of lso the precedents of Case law as the same is hereby dismissed. f any stand disposed of. ( NIDHI GUPTA ) JUDGE VIJAY ASIJA 2026.05.15 08.47 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document