TA-1113-2025 (O&M) --1-- 286 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH TA-1113-2025 (O&M) Decided on:-08.07.2026 Swati Verma ….Applicant. vs. Vikas Khanna ….Respondent. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA Present: Mr. Krishan Singh, Advocate with Mr. Deep Singh Saini, Advocate, for the applicant. Mr.R.S. Bajaj, Advocate with Mr. Sachin Kalia, Advocate, for the respondent. ***** HARKESH MANUJA J. (Oral) 1. By way of present application, prayer has been made seeking transfer of Civil Suit bearing No.CS-2117-2025, titled “Vikas Khanna vs. Swati Verma” from the Court of ld. Civil Judge (Junior Division), Jalandhar to ld. Civil Courts, District Yamuna Nagar at Jagadhari. 2. Briefly stating, the marriage between the applicant and one Ishu Bhola son of Sat Narayan Bhola took place on 03.05.2023 at Jagadhari; on account of temperamental differences both the parties started living separately. The applicant preferred divorce petition bearing HMA-711-2024, under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as “1955 Act”) for grant of decree of divorce before the learned Family Court, Yamuna Nagar at Jagadhari. The applicant also filed a petition bearing No.HMA-746-2024 under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, SONIKA 2026.07.15 09:52 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document TA-1113-2025 (O&M) --2-- 1955 (hereinafter referred to as “1955 Act”) for restitution of conjugal rights as well as complaint under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 (for short, “DV Act”) before the Court of ld. Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Yamuna Nagar against her husband, mother-in-law, sister-in-law and present respondent-Vikas Khanna, who happens to be the husband of her sister-in-law. In brief, the following allegations were levelled against the respondent and his wife in the petition under Section 12 of the DV Act:- 2.1 Respondents No.3 and 4 used filthy language against the complainant (present applicant) and her parents and instigated respondents No.1 and 2 (husband and mother-in-law of the present applicant) to commit domestic violence acts against the applicant, besides instigating them not to compromise the matter in any manner. 2.2 Upon receipt of notice in the said petition under Section 12 of DV Act, the respondent filed a suit for recovery by way of damages towards the loss of his reputation, harassment and financial loss etc., in the Court of ld. Civil Judge, Judicial Magistrate, Jalandhar, impleading the applicant as defendant in the suit. The relevant contents from the plaint are extracted hereunder:- “That the plaintiff is law abiding and peace loving citizen of India. The family of Plaintiff is very renowned family of his locality. Plaintiff is a goldsmith and running his shop in Gali Badar Kali, Kalan Bazaar Jalandhar since last more than 14 years. The father of the plaintiff was running this shop for more than 40 years. Plaintiff is the member of BJP and having very strong political image in the city as an youth leader of BJP. He is also a very active social worker. The father of plaintiff is the member of Sarafa association, Jalandhar. In this way Plaintiff is SONIKA 2026.07.15 09:52 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document TA-1113-2025 (O&M) --3-- enjoying very good reputation in the society. That defendant is the sister in law (wife of brother in law). Defendant filed a complaint under section 12 of Prevention of Women from Domestic Violence Act in which defendant has impleaded plaintiff as party (respondent no. 4). That the complaint of defendant is totally false and fabricated. Plaintiff is residing in Jalandhar alongwith his wife and he cannot be made party in domestic violence case as the matrimonial home of defendant 'is Jagadhari, Yamunanagar. Defendant levelled the false allegation of jus instigation in the entire complaint just to implead plaintiff and his wife party in that case being sister in law and brother in law (Nanad and Nandoia). Defendant leveled the false and frivolous allegations on Plaintiff and his wife, for which wife of plaintiff reserves separate right to file file suit against the defendant. Defendant also used the word 'Accused" for plaintiff in the said complaint. That on 25.07.2025, father of plaintiff was sitting on the shop and was attending some customers. Those customers were purchasing the gold ornaments of worth Rs. more than 20,00,000/- at that time. The process server came alongwith the notice of the domestic violence case and asked for the plaintiff. Father of plaintiff told that he is not available in the shop now. The process server told that the court case notice has to be served to him. By seeing the process server with court case notice, the customers felt the plaintiff as criminal and they did not purchase any gold item from the father of the plaintiff.” 3. Accordingly, the present application has been filed by the applicant seeking transfer of civil suit No.CS-2117-2025. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the paper book. 5. From the record, it can be discerned that the entire civil suit for recovery of damages preferred at the instance of respondent-plaintiff is SONIKA 2026.07.15 09:52 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document TA-1113-2025 (O&M) --4-- based upon the averments that the complaint filed under Section 12 of the DV Act by the applicant against the respondents is false and fabricated and the service of summons of the said complaint upon respondent-defendant in his showroom have caused him loss of reputation. 6. Primarily, the allegations levelled against the respondent at the hands of applicant in her complaint under Section 12 of the DV Act are yet to be decided during trial. Since, the basis of the suit preferred by the respondent is that the allegations levelled by the applicant in her complaint under Section 12 of the DV Act are false and frivolous, in the humble opinion of this Court, it would be desirable that Civil Suit bearing No.CS- 2117-2025, titled, “Vikas Khanna vs. Swati Verma” filed at the instance of respondent-plaintiff, should also be tried by the same Court where, the DV Act proceedings are pending, so as to avoid conflicting or contradictory findings. 7. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the transfer application is allowed and the Civil Suit bearing No.CS-2117-2025, titled, “Vikas Khanna vs. Swati Verma” filed at the instance of respondent- plaintiff, stands transferred from the Court of ld. Civil Judge (Junior Division) Jalandhar to the Family Court of competent jurisdiction at Jagadhari, District Yamuna Nagar. The requisite record of the aforesaid case be sent by the learned Court, Jalandhar to the Court concerned. 8. 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 2026.07.15 09:52 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document