TA-1671-20 IN THE HIG 205 Alka Mukesh CORAM: H Present: - NIDHI GUP 1. seeking tran 13 of the H DMC/165/20 Family Cour 2. 2025 -1- E HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HA TA-16 Date o .…Pet Versus .... Re M: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDH Mr. Vikas Bairagi, Advocate fo I GUPTA, J. (ORAL) By way of filing the present pe g transfer of petition filed by respon the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for s 165/2025 titled as ‘Mukesh vs. Alka y Court, Rohtak to a Court of competen Learned counsel for the petition i) The parties were married Hindu Rites and Ceremon ii) One son was born out 18.01.2022 who is curren of respondent-husband. iii) Due to matrimonial dis residing separately. iv) The petitioner has no ind She is presently residing other hand respondent is ND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 1671-2025 Date of Decision: 14.05.2026 Petitioner .... Respondent NIDHI GUPTA cate for the petitioner. sent petition, the petitioner-wife is espondent-husband under Section (for short-‘the Act’) bearing No. Alka’ pending before the learned mpetent jurisdiction at Sonepat. etitioner, inter alia, submits that :- arried on 04.12.2019 according to eremonies. rn out of the said wedlock on currently in the care and custody ial discord the parties are now independent source of income. esiding with her parents. On the ent is working with a private firm. RISHU KATARIA 2026.05.18 19:25 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. TA-1671-20 3. allowed and be transferre competent ju 4. appearance Vakalatnama respondent v counsel for taking care o firm. Theref earning and his minor c dismissed. 2025 -2- v) There is one case fil maintenance bearing No. adjudication before the respondent is not putting vi) The distance between petitioner-wife i.e. Ro proceedings filed by pending at Sonepat is a side. As such, it is very d undertake frequent travel Sonepat. It is accordingly, prayed that d and the bearing No. DMC/165/2025 nsferred from the learned Family C tent jurisdiction at Rohtak. Mr. Kisnshvk Nanda, Legal rance on behalf of the respond atnama in Court which is taken on rec dent vehemently opposes the submi el for the petitioner and submits tha care of the minor child. The respond Therefore, as the respondent has many g and providing for his family and e inor child, it is accordingly prayed se filed by the petitioner for ng No. MNT/169/2025 is pending e the Courts at Rohtak in which utting in appearance. een place of residence of the Rohtak and the place of by the respondent-husband, is about 52 kilometers on one very difficult for the petitioner to travel for the case from Rohtak to that the present petition may be 5/2025 titled as ‘Mukesh vs. Alka’ ily Court, Sonepat to a Court of Legal Aid Counsel has put in espondent-husband and submits on record. Learned counsel for the submissions advanced by learned its that the respondent is already spondent is working with a private many additional responsibilities of and ensuring proper upbringing of rayed that the present petition be RISHU KATARIA 2026.05.18 19:25 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. TA-1671-20 5. have heard l case file. I respondent. 6. respondent, her parents petitioner as proceedings single-hande the parties. N needs of mi welfare. In t case from not sufficien 7. cases of tran wife. Howev Supreme Co such case wh Vs. SrijitD circumstance petition filed to two cases dismissed tra 2025 -3- No other argument has been m eard learned counsel for the parties a ile. I find merit in the submissions dent. From the facts noted above, dent, the petitioner has no onerous re rents who take care of her. No cogent ner as to why she is unable to trave dings along with her father. On the handedly, taking care of the minor ch rties. Not only does the respondent ha minor son, but is also responsible e. In this situation, no equitable groun m Sonepat to Rohtak. Mere penden fficient reason to transfer. This Court is well aware of t of transfer emanating from matrimoni However, in certain similar cases as me Court, as well as this Court have r ase which may be referred to is: (2006 SrijitDas’ wherein Hon’ble Supr stances dismissed the wife’s appl n filed by the husband.Reference in t cases of this Court where, in similar sed transfer applications filed on beha een made on behalf of the parties. I rties and carefully gone through the issions advanced on behalf of the above, it is clear that unlike the ous responsibility and is living with cogent reason has been given by the travel to Sonepat to attend to the n the other hand, the respondent is nor child born out of the wedlock of ent have to provide for the material onsible for his mental and physical ground is made out to transfer the endency of other case at Rohtak is e of the preponderance of law in imonial disputes is in favour of the es as the present one, the Hon’ble have refused relief to the wife. One (2006) 9 SCC 197 ‘Anindita Das Supreme Court under similar application seeking transfer of ce in this regard may also be made imilar circumstances this Court had half of the wife. These are: TA I the the the with the the nt is k of erial sical r the is RISHU KATARIA 2026.05.18 19:25 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. TA-1671-20 no. 126 of 2 TA No. 299 8. present case finding no m 9. 14.05.2026 rishu 2025 -4- 6 of 2018 Smt. Akhwinder Kaur V o. 299 of 2019 Nisha alias Manisha v 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 aur Vs. Sh. Gurpreet Singh; and isha vs. Amarveer Yadav. 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.