TA-384-202 IN THE HIG 146 Kajal Sharm Shubham Sh CORAM: H Present: - NIDHI GUP 1. transfer of t and 12 of th No. HMA/3 (Annexure P Ludhiana to 2. 2025 -1- E HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HA TA-38 Date o Sharma Versus am Sharma M: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDH Mr. Bhrigu Dutt Sharma, Advoc Mr. Arpan Sabharwal, Advocate I GUPTA, J. (ORAL) Prayer in this petition filed b r of the petition filed by respondent of the Hindu Marriage Act,1955 (f MA/304/2025 titled ‘Shubham Sh xure P-1) pending in the Court of Pri to a Court of competent jurisdictio Learned counsel for the petition i) The parties were married Hindu Rites and customs. ii) No child was born out of iii) Due to matrimonial disc separately since 14.01.20 iv) The petitioner is jobless a whereas; on the other han ND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 384-2025 Date of Decision: 13.05.2026 .… Petitioner .... Respondent NIDHI GUPTA Advocate for the petitioner. vocate for the respondent. iled by the petitioner-wife is for ndent-husband under Sections 11 955 (for short ‘the Act’) bearing am Sharma vs. Kajal Sharma’ of Principal Judge, Family Court, sdiction at Panckula. etitioner, inter alia, submits that :- arried on 06.11.2024 according to stoms. out of the said wedlock. al discord the parties are residing .01.2025. bless and has no source of income er hand, respondent is working as RISHU KATARIA 2026.05.16 17:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. TA-384-202 3. allowed and learned Fam Kalka, Sessi 4. vehemently petitioner an been referred exploring th submitted th once; wherea times. It is su respondent 2025 -2- a Fashion Designer an month. Thus, petitioner maintain her livelihood. v) The distance between petitioner-wife i.e. Ka proceedings (Annexure husband, pending before Court, Ludhiana, is about vi) There is no direct connec and Ludhiana. As such, petitioner to undertake f from Kalka to Ludhiana. It is accordingly, prayed that d and the HMA/304/2025 (Annexure d Family Court, Ludhiana to a Court , Sessions Division, Panchkula. Per Contra, learned counsel a ently opposes the submissions advanc and submits that vide order date eferred to the Mediation and Concilia ing the possibility of amicable settlem tted that the petitioner-wife had appea whereas the respondent-husband had It is submitted that brother of the petit dent-husband with dire consequences er and earning ₹1,00,000/- per tioner has no source of income to ood. een place of residence of the Kalka and the place of xure P-1) filed by the respondent- before the Principal Judge, Family about 145 kilometers on one side. connectivity of bus between Kalka such, it is very difficult for the rtake frequent travel for the case hiana. that the present petition may be nexure P-1) be transferred from the Court of competent jurisdiction at nsel appearing for the respondent advanced by learned counsel for the r dated 12.02.2026 the matter had onciliation Centre of this Court for settlement between the parties. It is appeared before the Mediator only had on each and every date i.e. 3-4 e petitioner-wife had threatened the uences, in pursuance of which the RISHU KATARIA 2026.05.16 17:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. TA-384-202 respondent pointed out husband th accommodat Court proce case is pend reasons have from Kalka prays for d undertakes t petitioner-wi learned Fam 5. have heard l case file. I respondent. 6. that no exte petitioner, on travel to Lud Moreover, re the petitione the learned preponderan disputes is in 2025 -3- dent had registered a complaint in d out in the reply dated 10.10.2025 s that the respondent had agree modation and litigation expenses of th proceedings at Ludhiana. Learned co pending before the Courts at Panc s have been shown by the petitioner Kalka to Ludhiana. As such, learned for dismissal of the present petitio akes that the respondent shall pay a wife on the date(s) when she pu Family Court at Ludhaina towards tr No other argument has been m eard learned counsel for the parties a ile. I find merit in the submissions dent. In view of the facts as enumer o extenuating circumstances have b ner, on the basis of which it is shown Ludhiana and that too not daily but r, respondent has undertaken to pay titioner on each effective date of hear arned Family Court, Ludhaina. This derance of law in cases of transfer es is in favour of the wife. However, i int in the year 2025. It is further 2025 submitted by the respondent- agreed to pay all the travel, s of the petitioner for attending the ned counsel submits that no other t Panchkula or Kalka. No cogent itioner for not being able to travel earned counsel for the respondent petition. Further, learned counsel pay an amount of ₹2000/- to the she puts in appearance before the ards travelling expenses. een made on behalf of the parties. I rties and carefully gone through the issions advanced on behalf of the numerated above, I am of the view ave been brought to light by the hown that she is not in a position to ily but only on the dates of hearing. to pay travel expenses of ₹2000/- to f hearing when she appears before This Court is well aware of the nsfer emanating from matrimonial ever, in certain similar cases as the I the the RISHU KATARIA 2026.05.16 17:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. TA-384-202 present one, refused relie (2006) 9 SC Supreme C application s this regard m circumstance behalf of th Kaur Vs. S Manisha vs. 7. present case finding no m 8. 13.05.2026 rishu 2025 -4- t one, the Hon’ble Supreme Court, d relief to the wife. One such case w ) 9 SCC 197 ‘Anindita Das Vs. me Court under similar circumsta ation seeking transfer of petition filed gard may also be made to two cases o stances this Court had dismissed tr of the wife. These are: TA no. 12 Vs. Sh. Gurpreet Singh; and TA N ha vs. Amarveer Yadav. 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 Court, as well as this Court have case which may be referred to is: Vs. SrijitDas’ wherein Hon’ble umstances dismissed the wife’s n filed by the husband.Reference in ases of this Court where, in similar ssed transfer applications filed on o. 126 of 2018 Smt. Akhwinder TA No. 299 of 2019 Nisha alias 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 2026.05.16 17:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.