TA-1409-20 IN THE HIG 233 Mandeep Ka Japreet Sing CORAM: H Present: - NIDHI GUP 1. transfer of th the Hindu HMA/456/20 Kaur’ pendin to a Court of 2. 2024 -1- E HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HA TA-14 Date o eep Kaur Versus t Singh M: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDH Mr. JS Mahal, Advocate for the Mr. SS Randhawa, Advocate fo I GUPTA, J. (ORAL) Prayer in this petition filed b r of the petition filed by respondent indu Marriage Act,1955 (for shor /456/2024 (Annexure P-1) titled as pending in the Court of Principal Judg ourt of competent jurisdiction at Amrit Learned counsel for the petition i) The parties were married Sikh Rites and Ceremoni ii) No child was born out of iii) Due to matrimonial disc separately since 08.02.20 iv) The distance between petitioner-wife i.e. Am proceedings filed by t Gurdaspur, is about 75 very difficult for her Amritsar to Gurdaspu proceedings. ND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 1409-2024 Date of Decision: 15.05.2026 .…Petitioner .... Respondent NIDHI GUPTA for the petitioner. cate for the respondent. iled by the petitioner-wife is for ndent-husband under Section 9 of r short ‘the Act’) bearing No. ‘Jaspreet Singh vs. Mandeep al Judge, Family Court, Gurdaspur Amritsar. etitioner, inter alia, submits that :- arried on 25.11.2023 according to emonies. out of the said wedlock. al discord the parties are residing .02.2024. een place of residence of the Amritsar and the place of by the respondent-husband at 75 kilometers on one side. It is her to frequently travel from rdaspur to attend the Court RISHU KATARIA 2026.05.18 19:53 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. TA-1409-20 3. allowed and ‘Jaspreet Si Family Cour 4. opposes the and submits working. Mo months. The his old aged for dismissal 5. have heard l case file. I respondent. 6. that the peti adjudication transferred t Amritsar, as difficult for Gurdaspur. admitted tha 2024 -2- v) The petitioner has no residing her at parental h has also been expired. It is accordingly, prayed that d and petition bearing No. HMA/456/ eet Singh vs. Mandeep Kaur’ be t y Court, Gurdaspur to a Court of comp Per Contra, learned counsel fo es the submissions advanced by learn ubmits that the petitioner-wife is Gr Moreover, the marriage has subsi The respondent-husband has also th aged parents. As such, learned cou missal of the present petition. No other argument has been m eard learned counsel for the parties a ile. I find merit in the submissions dent. It is also submitted by learned e petition bearing No. HMA/456/202 cation before the learned Family Cour rred to a Court of competent jurisdi sar, as the father of the petitioner has for her to travel alone to attend spur. On a Court query, learned cou ed that there is no other case presentl s no source of income and is ntal house. Now, her ailing father that the present petition may be /456/2024 (Annexure P-1) titled as be transferred from the learned competent jurisdiction at Amritsar. nsel for the respondent vehemently y learned counsel for the petitioner is Graduate. However, she is not subsisted only for a period of 03 also the responsibility to look after d counsel for the respondent prays een made on behalf of the parties. I rties and carefully gone through the issions advanced on behalf of the learned counsel for the petitioner 56/2024 (Annexure P-1) pending y Court Gurdaspur, deserves to be jurisdiction at Sessions Division, er has now expired and it is very attend the Court proceedings at ed counsel for the petitioner has resently pending before the Courts . I the the RISHU KATARIA 2026.05.18 19:53 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. TA-1409-20 at Amritsar. has also adm 7. that no exte petitioner, o position to t dates of hear cases of tran wife. Howev Supreme Co such case wh Vs. SrijitD circumstance petition filed to two cases dismissed tra no. 126 of 2 TA No. 299 8. present case finding no m 9. 15.05.2026 rishu 2024 -3- ritsar. On another Court query, learne so admitted that she is a Graduate, how In view of the facts as enumer o extenuating circumstances have b ner, on the basis of which it is show n to travel to Gurdaspur, and that to of hearing. This Court is well aware o of transfer emanating from matrimoni However, in certain similar cases as me Court, as well as this Court have r ase which may be referred to is: (2006 SrijitDas’ wherein Hon’ble Supr stances dismissed the wife’s appl n filed by the husband.Reference in t cases of this Court where, in similar sed transfer applications filed on beha 6 of 2018 Smt. Akhwinder Kaur o. 299 of 2019 Nisha alias Manisha v Accordingly, in view of the fa t case as noted above, as also the prec g no merit in this petition, the same is h Pending application(s), if any, s 2026 Whether speaking/reasoned Whether Reportable learned counsel for the petitioner owever, she is not working. numerated above, I am of the view ave been brought to light by the s shown that petitioner is not in a that too not daily but only on the are of the preponderance of law in imonial disputes is in favour of the es as the present one, the Hon’ble have refused relief to the wife. One (2006) 9 SCC 197 ‘Anindita Das Supreme Court under similar application seeking transfer of ce in this regard may also be made imilar circumstances this Court had n behalf of the wife. These are: TA Vs. Sh. Gurpreet Singh; and isha vs. Amarveer Yadav. the facts and circumstances of the he precedents of Case law as above, me is hereby dismissed. any, shall also stand disposed of. ( NIDHI GUPTA ) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No the ove, RISHU KATARIA 2026.05.18 19:53 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.