TA-269-202 IN THE HIG 211 Sandeep Kau Malkit Kaur CORAM: H Present: - NIDHI GUP 1. transfer of th the Hindu M 2025 (Annex adjudication Division, Sa Sessions Div 2. 2026 -1- E HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HA TA-26 Date o ep Kaur Versus t Kaur M: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDH Mr. Saurabh Kaushik, Advocate I GUPTA, J. (ORAL) Prayer in this petition filed b r of the petition filed by respondent ndu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short ‘the Annexure P-2) titled as ‘Malkit Singh cation before the learned Family on, Sangrur to a Court of compet ns Division, Patiala. 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 04.06.20 iv) The petitioner has no ind whereas; on the other ha 35 bighas of agricultural earning more than ₹8, ND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 269-2026 Date of Decision: 14.05.2026 .…Petitioner .... Respondent NIDHI GUPTA vocate for the petitioner. iled by the petitioner-wife is for dent-husband under Section 13 of ort ‘the Act’) bearing No. HMA/7/ Singh vs. Sandeep Kaur’ pending amily Court, Sunam, Sessions ompetent jurisdiction at Nabha, etitioner, inter alia, submits that :- arried on 12.06.2023 according to emonies by way of Anand Karaj. out of the said wedlock. al discord the parties are residing .06.2024. independent source of income ther hand, respondent is owner of ltural land and is selling milk and 8,00,000/- per annum. The RISHU KATARIA 2026.05.18 19:25 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. TA-269-202 3. allowed and learned Fam Nabha, Sessi 4. on behalf of which is take 2026 -2- respondent is also runnin earning ₹3,00,000/- per year. As such, the respon per annum. v) The distance between petitioner-wife i.e. Na proceedings filed by pending at Sunam is abou As such, it is very dif undertake frequent travel Ludhiana. vi) There are 02 cases filed b are pending adjudication Sessions Division, Patiala (a) Complaint under Protection of Wom Act; and (b) Petition under Sec Suraksha Sanhita, before the learned It is accordingly, prayed that d and the HMA/7/22025 (Annexure d Family Court, Sunam to a Court , Sessions Division, Patiala. Mr. Parveen Kumar Garg, Adv half of the respondent-husband and su is taken on record. Learned counsel fo running Combine Harvester and is per harvesting season twice a respondent is earning ₹11,00,000/- een place of residence of the Nabha and the place of by the respondent-husband, is about 50 kilometers on one side. ry difficult for the petitioner to travel for the case from Kalka to filed by the petitioner-wife which cation before the Courts at Nabha, Patiala, which are as under:- under the provisions of the f Women from Domestic Violence er Section 144 Bharatiya Nagarik nhita, 2023 (125 Cr.P.C.) pending arned Family Court at Nabha. that the present petition may be exure P-2) be transferred from the Court of competent jurisdiction at , Advocate, has put in appearance and submits Vakalatnama in Court nsel for the respondent vehemently RISHU KATARIA 2026.05.18 19:25 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. TA-269-202 opposes the and submits XXXIII Rul Sangrur, Ca resident of v It is submit creating cha husband. As of the presen 5. have heard l case file. I respondent. 6. that no exte petitioner, on not disputed Courts, Sang also failed t from travelli that too not aware of the matrimonial cases as the Court have 2026 -3- es the submissions advanced by learn bmits that earlier the petitioner has f II Rule 1 CPC before the learned Pr ur, Camp Court at Sunam, wherein s nt of village ‘Chow Bas Jakhepal, Teh ubmitted that the said suit has been charge on the land stated to be As such, learned counsel for the re present petition. 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 transfer sho sputed that she has filed Civil Suit at , Sangrur to create charge on property ailed to show any such onerous respo ravelling the short distance of 50 Km o not daily but only on the dates of of the preponderance of law in case onial disputes is in favour of the wife as the present one, the Hon’ble Sup have refused relief to the wife. On y learned counsel for the petitioner has filed a Civil Suit under Order ed Principal Judge, Family Court, erein she has shown herself to be , Tehsil Sunam, District Sangrur’. s been filed by the petitioner for to be owned by the respondent- r the respondent prays for dismissal 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 fer should be granted. Petitioner has uit at Camp Court, Sunam, District operty of respondent. Petitioner has responsibility which prevents her 50 Kms from Nabha to Sunam and ates of hearing. This Court is well n cases of transfer emanating from e wife. However, in certain similar le Supreme Court, as well as this fe. One such case which may be I the the RISHU KATARIA 2026.05.18 19:25 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. TA-269-202 referred to is Hon’ble Sup application s this regard m circumstance behalf of th Kaur Vs. S Manisha vs. 7. present case finding no m 8. 14.05.2026 rishu 2026 -4- d to is: (2006) 9 SCC 197 ‘Anindita le Supreme Court under similar circum 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. 126 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 indita Das Vs. Srijit Das’ wherein circumstances 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 2026.05.18 19:25 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.