TA-1723-20 IN THE HIG 159 Daljit Kaur Gursant Sing CORAM: H Present: - NIDHI GUP 1. seeking tran 13 of the Hi No. 217 dat Daljit Kaur Nakodar, D Moga. 2. under: 2025 -1- E HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HA TA-17 Date o Kaur Versus nt Singh M: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDH Mr. Umesh Aggarwal, Advocat Mr. Arpan Sabharwal, Advocate I GUPTA, J. (ORAL) By way of filing the present pe transfer of petition filed by respon the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for sh 17 dated 05.03.2025 (Annexure P-1) Kaur’ pending before the learned ar, District Jalandhar to a Court o Learned counsel for the petitio i) that the parties solemnize ii) that no child was born ou iii) that due to matrimonial d separately since September, 202 iv) that both the parties are r It is submitted that despite the ND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 1723-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision: 12.05.2026 .… Petitioner .... Respondent NIDHI GUPTA dvocate for the petitioner. vocate for the respondent. sent petition, the petitioner-wife is espondent-husband under Section (for short-‘the Act’) bearing DMC 1) titled as ‘Gursant Singh vs. earned Family Court, Camp at ourt of competent jurisdiction at petitioner, inter alia, submits as mnized marriage on 15.05.2017. orn out of the said wedlock. onial discord the parties are living 2023. s are residing in United Kingdom. ite the above fact, the respondent- RISHU KATARIA 2026.05.14 20:10 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. TA-1723-20 3. transfer of th 4. vehemently the petitione the learned However, on that the resp filed under S Attorney Ho 2025 -2- husband had filed the instant pe Section 13 of the Act on 05 adjudication before the learne Nakodar, District Jalandhar. v) that the petitioner is resid is appearing before the learne through her Power of Attorney mother who has various health p vi) that the distance betwee the mother of the petitioner proceedings at Nakodar is abou and it is difficult for the mothe frequently for the case. vii) that father of the petitio 2024; and her brother is also res It is, inter alia, on these grou r of the case, as detailed in para 2 abo Per Contra, learned counsel ap ently opposes the submissions advan titioner and submits that mother of the arned Family Court, concerned thr on a Court query, learned counse e respondent-husband is pursuing th nder Section 13 of the Act (Annexure ey Holder who is his father. tant petition (Annexure P-1) under on 05.03.2025 which is pending learned Family Court, Camp at is residing in United Kingdom and learned Family Court, concerned torney Holder who is her old aged ealth problems. etween the place of residence of titioner at Moga and place of s about 55 kilometers on one side mother of the petitioner to travel petitioner-wife had died in April, lso residing abroad. e grounds that petitioner prays for above. nsel appearing for the respondent advanced by learned counsel for of the petitioner can appear before ed through Video Conferencing. counsel for the respondent admits uing the aforesaid HMA petition nexure P-1) through his Power of RISHU KATARIA 2026.05.14 20:10 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. TA-1723-20 5. have heard l view of the submissions 6. sufficient gro established. rendered in Live Law (S held as unde 7. Singh vs Ku Kishor Bab Supreme C 2025 -3- No other argument has been ma 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 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 r Babulal Pardeshi, 2005(12) SCC me Court has observed that “w 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 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 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 id of RISHU KATARIA 2026.05.14 20:10 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. TA-1723-20 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 appropriate conditions: 2025 -4- 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 riate to allow the present petition ions:- a) The petition (Annexure husband under Section 13 of A dated 05.03.2025 (Annexure P vs. Daljit Kaur’ pending before 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 etition, subject to the following xure P-1) filed by respondent- of Act, bearing DMC No. 217 ure P-1) titled as ‘Gursant Singh before the learned Family Court, RISHU KATARIA 2026.05.14 20:10 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. TA-1723-20 10. refer the cas the possibilit 11. between the calendar mon 12. Bench of th Talwar; TA Singh; and 13. 14. 12.05.2026 rishu 2025 -5- Camp at Nakodar, District Ja Court of competent jurisdiction b) The learned District Jud transfer complete record pertai District Judge, Moga. c) The parties are directed Judge, Moga on 15.06.2026. d) The District Judge, Moga to the Court of competent jurisd The concerned Court at Moga he case before the Mediation and Con ssibility of some amicable settlement b 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 r; 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 rict Jalandhar is transferred to a iction at Moga. ict Judge, Jalandhar is directed to pertaining to the aforesaid case to ected to appear before the District Moga will assign the said petition t jurisdiction. Moga will make all endeavour to d Conciliation Centre for exploring ment 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 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 20:10 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.