TA-647-2025 (O&M) --1-- 285 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH TA-647-2025 (O&M) Decided on:-08.07.2026 Mrs. Manju Kumari ….Applicant. vs. Dinesh Chaudhary ….Respondent. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA Present: Mr. Dixit Garg, Advocate for the applicant. Mr.Ram Bilas Gupta, Advocate for the respondent. ***** HARKESH MANUJA J. (Oral) 1. The applicant-wife, by way of present application, seeks transfer of petition bearing HMA/273/2024 (Annexure P-1), titled “Dinesh Chaudhary @ Chintu vs. Manju Kumari”, filed under Section 13(1) (ia) (ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter to be referred as “1955 Act”) at the instance of respondent-husband; from the Court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Faridabad to the competent Court of jurisdiction at Hodal. 2. Briefly stating, the marriage between the applicant and respondent was solemnized on 05.02.2007; out of their wedlock, a male child namely, Master Yash was born; on account of matrimonial discord between the parties, the above mentioned petition under Section 13(1) (ia) (ib) of the 1955 Act, came to be preferred at the instance of respondent-husband. Thereupon, the present application seeking transfer thereof came to be filed by the applicant-wife. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant, inter alia, contends that the SONIKA 2026.07.13 10:40 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document TA-647-2025 (O&M) --2-- applicant-wife has also filed the following three cases, which are pending before the ld. Family Court, Palwal having camp Court at Hodal:- (i) petition bearing MNT125-275/2024, under Section 144 BNSS, 2023 for grant of maintenance; (ii) complaint bearingNo.DVAct-63-2024, under Sections 12, 18, 19, 20 and 22 of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005; (iii) FIR No.171 dated 12.10.2024, under Sections 498-a, 406, 323 IPC, registered at Women Police Station, Palwal and the trial is going on. It is submitted that the applicant is residing alongwith her son at her parental home at Palwal. Accordingly, a prayer is made for transfer of the above mentioned petition filed at the instance of respondent-husband from Family Court, Faridabad to Family Court, Palwal having Camp Court at Hodal. 4. While filing reply, learned counsel for the respondent vehemently opposes the prayer made on behalf of the applicant. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the paper-book. 6. In the present case, admittedly, the applicant-wife has filed the aforementioned petitions, which are pending adjudication before the learned Court at Palwal having camp Court at Hodal. 7. As per the averments made in the present transfer application, the applicant-wife has no independent source of income and is solely dependent on her parents. Besides it, the applicant is also taking care of her son, namely, Yash, who is studying at Hodal. 8. Furthermore, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in its decision rendered in “Manjula Singh Chouhan Versus Vishal Singh Chouhan”, reported as 2019 (13) SCC 660 held that, in the interest of both the parties, all connected SONIKA 2026.07.13 10:40 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document TA-647-2025 (O&M) --3-- matrimonial proceedings should ordinarily be heard by the same Court and, accordingly, allowed the transfer application therein. Relevant paragraphs No. 3 to 5 thereof are reproduced hereunder:- “3. As per the submission of the appellant, two cases are already pending in Family Court, Bhopal, and it will be in the interests of both the parties to try all their cases in Bhopal. Learned counsel for the respondent however, submits that it will suit to the appellant only, therefore, transfer may not be permitted. The fact remains that the respondent has to travel to Bhopal for conduct of other cases pending in Family Court, Bhopal. 4. We are of the view that it will be in the interests of both the parties that all their cases be heard together by the same Court. 5. Therefore, H.M.A. Case No.71/2016 is transferred from Family Court, Indore to the Family Court, Bhopal.” 9. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, in the humble opinion of this Court, since three cases i.e. maintenance petition under Section 144 BNSS, complaint under Section 12, 18, 19, 20 and 22 of DV Act and complaint arising out of FIR No.171 are pending adjudication at Hodal, therefore, it would be in the interest of both the parties that all their cases be heard together by the same Court. Consequently the transfer application is allowed and the petition under Section 13(1) (ia) (ib) of the 1955 Act i.e. HMA/273/2024, titled “Dinesh Chaudhary @ Chintu vs. Manju Kumari”, filed by the respondent-husband, stands transferred from the Court of ld. Principal Judge, Family Court, Faridabad to the Family Court, Palwal having Camp Court at Hodal. The requisite record of the aforesaid case be sent by the learned Court, Faridabad to the Court concerned. 10. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed off. 08.07.2026 (HARKESH MANUJA) sonika JUDGE (i) Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No (ii) Whether reportable: Yes/ No SONIKA 2026.07.13 10:40 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document