1 ( 2025:HHC:9534 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CMPMO No.633 of 2024 Date of Decision : 07.04.2025 Sapna …… Petitioner Versus Avnish Kumar ……Respondent Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Bipin Chander Negi, Judge Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner : Mr. Gurinder Singh Parmar, Advocate. For the respondent : Mr. Munish Dhatwalia, Advocate. Bipin Chander Negi, Judge (oral) The present petition has been filed seeking following relief:- “ It is, therefore, prayed that the petition may kindly be allowed and the case titled as “Avnish versus Sapna” having case No.Guardians and Wards Act/6/2024 be transferred from the court of Addl. Principal Judge, Family Court, (Circuit Court at Barsar) Hamirpur, Himachal Pradesh to the court of Addl. Principal Judge, Family Court (Circuit Court at Amb) Una, Himachal Pradesh, in the best interest of justice.” 1 Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 ( 2025:HHC:9534 ) 2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the pleadings and documents appended along-with present petition. 3. The marriage inter se the parties was solemnized on 10.10.2018. Out of the wedlock, one son who is about 4 years of age and is presently residing with the petitioner was born. The respondent is serving in the Indian Army. Presently, the petitioner is residing with her parents along with her son since 24.12.2022. She has no independent source of income. For financial assistance, she is totally dependent upon her parents. Another proceedings under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, which had been filed by the respondent at Hamirpur (Circuit Court at Barsar) at the instance of the present petitioner vide judgment dated 16.12.2024, passed in CMPMO No.120 of 2024, titled Sapna vs. Avnish Kumar, stand transferred to the Court of learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court (Circuit Court at Amb), District Una. 4. Besides the aforesaid, proceedings under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure filed at the behest of the present petitioner are also stated to be pending adjudication before the Family Court, Una (Circuit Court at Amb). 5. The only contention urged by the respondent is that the petitioner is residing at Chandigarh. In order to support this contention, reliance has been placed on the report of the Process 3 ( 2025:HHC:9534 ) Service qua summons issued in the petition under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, wherein, it is so recorded by the Process Server. As has already been stated, the aforesaid proceedings vide judgment dated 16.12.2024, passed in CMPMO No.120 of 2024, titled Sapna vs. Avnish Kumar, stand transferred to the Court of learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court (Circuit Court at Amb), District Una. Moreover, in response to the aforesaid averment in the rejoinder filed, the summon served upon the present petitioner in proceedings filed under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, has been placed on record, where from it is evident that service of the present petitioner in the said case had been effected on the address mentioned in the present cause title (summon served on the petitioner qua 16th March, 2024). 6. In Civil Appeal No.4894 of 2022 [arising out of SLP(C) No(s).16465 of 2021], titled as N.C.V. Aishwarya versus A.S. Saravana Karthik Sha, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has outlined the cardinal principles for considering prayer for transfer of proceedings, from one Court-place to another, in matrimonial matters in the following terms. “7. The cardinal principle for exercise of power under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure is that the ends of justice should demand the transfer of the suit, appeal or other proceeding. In matrimonial matters, wherever Courts are called 4 ( 2025:HHC:9534 ) upon to consider the plea of transfer, the Courts have to take into consideration the economic soundness of both the parties, the social strata of the spouses and their behavioural pattern, their standard of life prior to the marriage and subsequent thereto and the circumstances of both the parties in eking out their livelihood and under whose protective umbrella they are seeking their sustenance to life. Given the prevailing socioeconomic paradigm in the Indian society, generally, it is the wife’s convenience which must be looked at while considering transfer. 8. Further, when two or more proceedings are pending in different Courts between the same parties which raise common question of fact and law, and when the decisions in the cases are interdependent, it is desirable that they should be tried together by the same Judge so as to avoid multiplicity in trial of the same issues and conflict of decisions.” 7. In view of the aforesaid facts and attending circumstances of the case and in view of the law enunciated by the Apex Court, present petition is allowed. The petition filed under the Guardians and Wards Act, 1870 bearing No.6/2024, titled Avnish vs. Sapna, pending before the Court of learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Hamirpur (Circuit Court at Barsar) is ordered to be transferred to the Court of learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Una (Circuit Court at Amb). 5 ( 2025:HHC:9534 ) 8. In view of above terms, present petition stands disposed of, so also, the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. 9. The parties are directed to appear before the trial Court on 23.04.2025. (Bipin Chander Negi) April 07, 2025 (KS) Judge