TA-1717-20 IN TH 134 Sonika Jaswinder Si CORAM: H Present: - NIDHI GUP 1. seeking tran (Annexure respondent (for short- 05.09.2024 by the petiti learned Fam 2. as under: 2025 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB CHANDIGARH TA-17 Date o Versus der Singh M: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDH Petitioner-Sonika is present in p Mr. Ashutosh Sharma, Advocat I GUPTA, J. (ORAL) By way of filing the present pe g transfer of 02 petitions i.e. (a) p xure P-1) titled as ‘Jaswinder Sin dent-husband under Section 13 of the -‘the Act’); and (b) petition 2024 (Annexure P-2) titled as ‘Sonik petitioner-wife under Section 9 of t d Family Court, Rupnagar to the Famil The petitioner who is present in i) The parties solemnized according to Hindu Rites ii) No child was born out of NJAB AND HARYANA AT GARH 1717-2025 Date of Decision: 15.05.2026 .… Petitioner .... Respondent NIDHI GUPTA nt in person. dvocate for the respondent. sent petition, the petitioner-wife is . (a) petition No. HMA-94-2021 er Singh vs. Sonika’ filed by of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 ion No. HMA-1930-2024 dated Sonika vs. Jaswinder Singh’ filed 9 of the Act, pending before the Family Court, Chandigarh. sent in person, inter alia, submits nized marriage on 11.12.2019 Rites and Ceremonies. out of the said wedlock. RISHU KATARIA 2026.05.18 19:48 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. TA-1717-20 3. allowed; an 2025 -2- iii) Due to matrimonial dis separately since February iv) At present the petitioner contract basis with t Authority, U.T. Chandiga avail leave to travel freq Rupnagar to pursue petitions. It is pointed ou taken by her, a show-cau (Annexure P-3) has been avoid being absent from d v) Petitioner who is present present job as Clerk is th as, the respondent-husban way of maintenance. vi) There are 03 cases filed b are pending adjudicat Chandigarh i.e. (i) und Protection of Women fro 2005; (ii) under Section 125 Cr.P.C.) for mainte with the U.T. Police for the respondent-husband. It is accordingly prayed that and both the petitions bearin ial discord the parties are living bruary, 2020. tioner-wife is working as Clerk on ith the State Legal Services andigarh. As such she is unable to el frequently from Chandigarh to rsue both the aforementioned ted out that due to frequent leaves cause notice dated 10.10.2023 s been issued to the petitioner to from duty. present in person submits that the k is the only source of her income husband is not paying anything by filed by the petitioner-wife which judication at District Courts, i) under the provisions of the en from Domestic Violence Act, ction 144 BNSS of 2023 (Section maintenance; and (iii) complaint ce for registration of case against band. that the present petition may be bearing Nos. (a) HMA-94-2021 RISHU KATARIA 2026.05.18 19:48 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. TA-1717-20 (Annexure respondent (Annexure P petitioner-wi Rupnagar to 4. opposes the and submits HMA-870- Act before t petitioner cla pending befo representing also facing th 5. have heard l case file. I f respondent. 6. sufficient gro established. rendered in Live Law (S held as unde 2025 -3- xure P-1) titled as ‘Jaswinder Si dent-husband; and (b) HMA-193 xure P-2) titled as ‘Sonika vs. Jas wife petition be transferred from to the Family Court at Chandigarh Per Contra, learned counsel fo es the submissions advanced by the pe ubmits that the petitioner herself ha -2024 dated 30.09.2024 (Annexur efore the learned Family Court, Rupn ner clarifies that although, the aforesa g before the learned Family Court, Ru ing her in the said case has refused cing threats from the respondent-side. No other argument has been m eard learned counsel for the parties a ile. I find no merit in the submission dent. Besides the facts as noticed h ent grounds for transfer, the legal posi ished. In this regard, judgment of ed in N.C.V. Aishwarya vs A.S. Sa aw (SC) 627, is notable, wherein the s under:- “9. The cardinal principle section 24 of the Code of Civil er Singh vs. Sonika’ filed by 1930-2024 dated 05.09.2024 Jaswinder Singh’ filed by the d from the learned Family Court, digarh. nsel for the respondent vehemently the petitioner who is present person elf has filed petition bearing No. nnexure P-2) under Section 9 of the Rupnangar. On a Court query, the foresaid petition (Annexure P-2) is urt, Rupnagar, however, the counsel refused to pursue the same as, he is side. een made on behalf of the parties. I rties and carefully gone through the issions advanced on behalf of the iced hereinabove, which constitute al position in such like cases is well t of the Hon’ble Supreme Court .S. Saravana Karthik Sha,” 2022 ein the Hon’ble Supreme Court has ple for exercise of power under ivil Procedure is that the ends of I the the itute well ourt 022 has er of RISHU KATARIA 2026.05.18 19:48 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. TA-1717-20 7. Singh vs Ku Kishor Bab Supreme C application, consideratio legal proce allowed, tak should desis 8. aforesaid pr considering the wife, the custody of th health and 2025 -4- justice should demand the tra other proceeding. In matrimon are called upon to consider th have to take into consideratio both the parties, the social str behavioural pattern, their sta marriage and subsequent ther both the parties in eking out whose protective umbrella they to life. Given the prevailing so Indian society, generally, it is must be looked at while conside 10. Further, when two or mo different Courts between the common question of fact and la the cases are interdependent, it be tried together by the sa multiplicity in trial of the s decisions.” Further reliance can be placed u vs Kumar Sanjay, 2002 SC 396 and r Babulal Pardeshi, 2005(12) SCC me Court has observed that “w ion, the Courts are required to ration to the convenience of the fem roceedings from one Court to an , taking into consideration their c esist from putting female litigants un Even this Court in number aid principle of law. Accordingly, i ering the transfer of a matrimonial di ife, the Court is to consider the fami y of the minor child, economic condi and earning capacity of the husba e transfer of the suit, appeal or imonial matters, wherever Courts r the plea of transfer, the Courts ation the economic soundness of l strata of the spouses and their r standard of life prior to the thereto and the circumstances of out their livelihood and under they are seeking their sustenance g socioeconomic paradigm in the it is the wife's convenience which sidering transfer. r more proceedings are pending in the same parties which raise nd law, and when the decisions in nt, it is desirable that they should e same Judge so as to avoid he same issues and conflict of aced upon the judgments in Sumita and Rajani Kishor Pardeshivs ) SCC 237, wherein the Hon’ble “while deciding the transfer to give more weightage and e female litigants and transfer of o another should ordinarily be eir convenience and the Courts ts under undue hardships.” mber of cases has followed the ngly, it is well settled that while nial dispute/case, at the instance of e family condition of the wife, the condition of the wife, her physical husband and most important the or rts rts of eir he of er ce he ch in ise in ld id of RISHU KATARIA 2026.05.18 19:48 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. TA-1717-20 convenience a male mem her place of travelling ex 9. Rajani Kish (supra) pass appropriate conditions: 2025 -5- nience of the wife i.e. she cannot trave e member of her family, connectivity ace of residence as well as bearing ing expenses. In view of the judgments i.e. i Kishor Pardeshi’s case (supra) an ) passed by the Hon’ble Supreme riate to allow the present petition ions:- a) Both the petitions beari (Annexure P-1) titled Sonika’ filed by the re petition under Section HMA-1930-2024 dated titled as ‘Sonika vs. Jas petitioner-wife, pending Court, Rupnagar is transf Chandigarh. b) The learned District Jud transfer complete recor aforesaid cases to District c) The parties are directed t Judge, Chandigarh on 1 d) The District Judge, Chan petitions to the Court of c t travel alone without assistance of ctivity of the place to and fro from aring of the litigation charges and s i.e. Sumita Singh’s case (supra), ra) and N.C.V. Aishwarya’s case reme Court, this Court deems it etition, subject to the following bearing Nos. (a) HMA-94-2021 titled as ‘Jaswinder Singh vs. the respondent-husband; and (b) ction 9 of the Act bearing No. dated 05.09.2024 (Annexure P-2) Jaswinder Singh’ filed by the nding before the learned Family transferred to the Family Court at ct Judge, Rupnagar is directed to record pertaining to both the istrict Judge, Chandigarh. ected to appear before the District 17.06.2026. Chandigarh will assign the said rt of competent jurisdiction. RISHU KATARIA 2026.05.18 19:48 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. TA-1717-20 10. to refer the exploring the 11. between the calendar mon 12. Bench of th Talwar; TA Singh; and 13. 14. 15.05.2026 rishu 2025 -6- The concerned Court at Chandi er the case before the Mediation a ing the possibility of some amicable se The Court concerned, where en the parties, will accommodate ar month. I am supported by the decision of this Court in TA No. 1315/20 r; TA No. 1322 of 2022, Jaswind ; and TA No. 1323 of 2022, Usha Ran The present petition stands disp Pending application(s), if any, s 2026 Whether speaking/reasoned Whether Reportable handigarh will make all endeavour tion and Conciliation Centre for able settlement between the parties. where the litigation is pending them with one date in one ecisions rendered by a Co-ordinate 315/2022, Rohini Arora v Nitin aswinder Kaur v Gurvinderjeet a Rani v Karmajit Singh. disposed of, in the above terms. any, shall also stand disposed of. ( NIDHI GUPTA ) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No RISHU KATARIA 2026.05.18 19:48 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.