TA-1683-20 IN THE HIG 156 Nishtha AmanGoyal CORAM: Present: - NIDHI GUP 1. seeking tran 13 (1) (ia) No. DMC/4 Goyal vs. N a Court of c Court, Camp 2. under: 2025 -1- E HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HA TA-16 Date o Versus yal .... Re HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDH Mr. Jagjot Singh, Advocate for Mr. Ashish Gupta, Advocate fo I GUPTA, J. (ORAL) By way of filing the present pe transfer of petition filed by respon of the Hindu Marriage Act,1955 /451/2025 dated 01.07.2025(Ann Nishtha’ pending before the learn rt of competent jurisdiction i.e. learn Camp Court at Khanna, District Ludh Learned counsel for the petitio i) that the parties solemnize ii) that one daughter was bo on 16.04.2023, who is custody of the petitioner ND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 1683-2025 Date of Decision: 13.05.2026 .…Petitioner .... Respondent NIDHI GUPTA te for the petitioner. ate for the respondent. sent petition, the petitioner-wife is espondent-husband under Section ,1955 (for short-‘the Act’) bearing (Annexure P-4) titled as ‘Aman e learned Family Court, Rohtak to . learned Principal Judge, Family t Ludhiana. petitioner, inter alia, submits as mnized marriage on 10.12.2020. was born out of the said wedlock ho is presently in the care and tioner-mother. RISHU KATARIA 2026.05.14 19:55 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. TA-1683-20 3. case, as deta 2025 -2- iii) that due to matrimonial d separately since January, iv) that the petitioner is wo Branch Firoz Gandhi Mar v) that there are 03 cases which are pending adju Ludhiana which are as un (a) Petition for mainte under Section 144 No. MNT-125/70/ the learned Fami Khanna, District L (b) Petition under Sec Wards Act, 18 appointment of daughterbefore the Court at Khanna, D (c) Criminal case arisi 09.09.2025(Annex Section 85 BNS, Khanna. vi) that the distance between petitioner at Khanna Rohtak is about 270kilo it is difficult for her to the case from Khanna child. It is on these grounds that petiti s detailed in para 2 above. onial discord the parties are living nuary, 2025. is working in IDFC First Bank, hi Market, Ludhiana. cases filed by the petitioner-wife g adjudication at District Courts e as under:- maintenance qua minor child filed 144 of the BNNS, 2023; bearing 25/70/2025 (Annexure P-2) before Family Court, Camp Court at trict Ludhiana; er Section 7 of the Guardians and t, 1890 (Annexure P-3) for of Guardian of the minor re the learned Family Court, Camp nna, District Ludhiana. e arising out of FIR No. 142 dated Annexure P-1)registered under BNS, 2023 at Police Station City etween the place of residence of the nna and place of proceedings at kilometers on one side. As such, er to undertake frequent travel for anna to Rohtak along with minor t petitioner prays for transfer of the RISHU KATARIA 2026.05.14 19:55 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. TA-1683-20 4. vehemently the petitione before the C of petition (A 5. have heard l view of the submissions 6. sufficient gro established. rendered in Live Law (S held as unde 2025 -3- Per Contra, learned counsel ap ently opposes the submissions advan titioner and submits that all the 03 afo the Courts at Khanna have been filed ition (Annexure P-1) by the respondent No other argument has been m eard learned counsel and carefully g of the undisputed facts as noted ab ssions advanced on behalf of the respo 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 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 nsel appearing for the respondent advanced by learned counsel for 03 aforementioned cases pending n filed by the petitioner after filing ondent-husband. een made on behalf of the parties. I fully gone through the case file. In ted above, I find no merit in the respondent. iced hereinabove, which constitute al position in such like cases is well t of the Hon’ble Supreme Court .S. Saravana Karthik Sha,” 2022 the Hon’ble Supreme Court has ple for exercise of power under ivil Procedure is that the ends of 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 I n the itute well ourt 022 has er of or rts rts of eir he of er ce he ch in ise in ld RISHU KATARIA 2026.05.14 19:55 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. TA-1683-20 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 convenience a male mem her place of travelling ex 9. Rajani Kish (supra) pass 2025 -4- 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 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 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. Kishor Pardeshi’s case (supra) an ) passed by the Hon’ble Supreme 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 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 id of RISHU KATARIA 2026.05.14 19:55 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. TA-1683-20 appropriate conditions: 10. to refer the exploring the 11. between the calendar mon 12. Bench of th 2025 -5- riate to allow the present petition ions:- a) The petition bearing N 01.07.2025(Annexure P-4) file titled as ‘Aman Goyal vs. N learned Family Court, Rohtak competent jurisdiction i.e. learn Court, Camp Court at Khanna, d b) The learned District Ju transfer complete record pertai District Judge, Ludhiana c) The parties are directed Judge, Ludhiana on 15.06.2026 d) The District Judge, Lu petition to the Court of compete The concerned Court at Ludhi er the case before the Mediation a ing the possibility of some amicable se The Court concerned, where en the parties, will accommodate t ar month. I am supported by the decision of this Court in TA No. 1315/20 etition, subject to the following ring No. DMC/451/2025 dated 4) filed by respondent- husband Nishtha’ pending before the ohtak is transferred to a Court of e. learned Principal Judge, Family anna, district Ludhiana. rict Judge, Rohtak is directed to pertaining to the aforesaid case to ected to appear before the District .2026. Ludhiana will assign the said mpetent jurisdiction. Ludhiana will make all endeavour tion and Conciliation Centre for able settlement between the parties. where the litigation is pending date them with one date in one ecisions rendered by a Co-ordinate 315/2022, Rohini Arora v Nitin RISHU KATARIA 2026.05.14 19:55 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. TA-1683-20 Talwar; TA Singh; and 13. 14. 13.05.2026 rishu 2025 -6- 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 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 2026.05.14 19:55 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.