139 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Transfer Application No. 9 of 2025 (O&M) Date of Decision: 09.07.2026 Manpreet Kaur .......... Petitioner Versus Jaideep Singh Naroo .......... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA Present: Mr. B.B.S. Randhawa, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Pardeep Kumar, Advocate for the respondent. **** HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL) The petitioner-wife, by way of present application/petition, seeks transfer of petition bearing DMC/710/2024, titled “Jaideep Singh Naroo Versus Manpreet Kaur” filed under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 at the instance of respondent-husband; from the Court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Bathinda to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Batala. [2] Learned counsel for the petitioner prays for transfer of the above said petition from Bathinda to Batala on the following grounds:- (i) that the applicant-wife alongwith two minor sons is residing at Batala; (ii) that she is working as teacher in private school and there is a distance of more than 240 kms. between Bathinda and Batala; (iii) that there is threat to the petitioner from the side of respondent and his family members; (v) that three more cases filed by the petitioner are pending in the Camp Court at Batala. DINESH KUMAR 2026.07.13 18:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document T.A. No. 9 of 2025 (O&M) [2] [3] On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent vehemently opposes the prayer made on behalf of the petitioner. [4] Having heard learned counsel for the parties besides going through the record, I find substance in the submission(s) made on behalf of the petitioner. [5] Besides the facts/submission(s) noticed on behalf of the petitioner, the legal position in such like cases as the present one is also very clear. Reference in this regard may made to a decision rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in its decision rendered in Manjula Singh Chouhan Versus Vishal Singh Chouhan, reported as 2019 (13) SCC 660, wherein it has been held that, in the interest of both the parties, all connected matrimonial proceedings should ordinarily be heard by the same Court and, accordingly, allowed the transfer application therein. Relevant paras-3 to 5 of the aforesaid decision are extracted 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.” [6] Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, in the humble opinion of this Court, it would be in the interest of both the parties that all their cases be heard together at same place. Consequently, the transfer application is allowed and the petition bearing DMC/710/2024 DINESH KUMAR 2026.07.13 18:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document T.A. No. 9 of 2025 (O&M) [3] (supra) filed at the instance of respondent-husband, stands transferred from the Family Court, Bathinda to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Family Court, Gurdaspur, Camp Court at Batala. The requisite record of the aforesaid case be sent by the Family Court, Bathinda to the Court concerned at the earliest where the parties would appear within a period of one month from today. [7] Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed off. July 09, 2026 ( HARKESH MANUJA ) 'dk kamra' JUDGE Whether Speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No DINESH KUMAR 2026.07.13 18:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document