1 209(1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH JYOTI ALIAS JYOTI SHARMA VINOD KUMAR AND OTHERS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Present: Mr. Tarun K. Sharma, Mr. Sachin Kumar, Advocate for the respondents. HARKESH MANUJA 1. The applicant of petition bearing CS/2969/2025, titled “Vinod Kumar Vs. Jyoti and Ors”, filed at the instance of respondent No.1 from the Court of learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Gharaunda, District Karnal to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Char 2. Briefly stating, the marriage between the applicant and respondent No.1 matrimonial discord between mentioned petition came to be preferred at the instance of No.1. Thereupon, the present application seeking transfer thereof came to be filed by the applicant 3. Learned counsel for the applicant, applicant-wife is residing at her parental home at Accordingly, a prayer is made for transfer of the above mentioned petition filed at the instance of respondent Karnal to District Courts, Charkhi Dadri. 4. On the other hand, 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 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: JYOTI ALIAS JYOTI SHARMA Versus VINOD KUMAR AND OTHERS HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA Mr. Tarun K. Sharma, Advocate for the Mr. Sachin Kumar, Advocate for the respondents. **** HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL) The applicant-wife, by way of present application, seeks transfer of petition bearing CS/2969/2025, titled “Vinod Kumar Vs. Jyoti and Ors”, filed at the instance of respondent No.1 from the Court of learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Gharaunda, District Karnal to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Charkhi Dadri. Briefly stating, the marriage between the applicant and No.1 was solemnized on 10.02.2019, discord between applicant-wife and her husband mentioned petition came to be preferred at the instance of . Thereupon, the present application seeking transfer thereof came to be filed by the applicant-wife. Learned counsel for the applicant, inter alia wife is residing at her parental home at Accordingly, a prayer is made for transfer of the above mentioned petition filed at the instance of respondent No.1-husband from Karnal to District Courts, Charkhi Dadri. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent vehemently opposes the prayer made on behalf of the applicant I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the In the present case, admittedly, the applicant TA-622-2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH TA-622-2026 Date of Decision: AUGUST 13, 2026 ........Applicant .....Respondents HARKESH MANUJA Advocate for the applicant. Mr. Sachin Kumar, Advocate for the respondents. wife, by way of present application, seeks transfer of petition bearing CS/2969/2025, titled “Vinod Kumar Vs. Jyoti and Ors”, filed at the instance of respondent No.1 from the Court of learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Gharaunda, District Karnal to the khi Dadri. Briefly stating, the marriage between the applicant and brother of 10.02.2019, on account of wife and her husband, the above mentioned petition came to be preferred at the instance of respondent . Thereupon, the present application seeking transfer thereof came inter alia, contends that the wife is residing at her parental home at Charkhi Dadri. Accordingly, a prayer is made for transfer of the above mentioned petition husband from District Courts On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondents vehemently opposes the prayer made on behalf of the applicant. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the In the present case, admittedly, the applicant-wife has filed 2026 AUGUST 13, 2026 wife, by way of present application, seeks transfer of petition bearing CS/2969/2025, titled “Vinod Kumar Vs. Jyoti and Ors”, filed at the instance of respondent No.1 from the Court of learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Gharaunda, District Karnal to the brother of on account of , the above respondent . Thereupon, the present application seeking transfer thereof came , contends that the . Accordingly, a prayer is made for transfer of the above mentioned petition District Courts s I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the has filed TEJWINDER SINGH 2026.08.18 16:51 I agree to specified portions of this document 2 TA-622-2026 following petitions at Charkhi Dadri: i. a maintenance petition under Section 144 of BNSS bearing No.MNT/125/222/2025 ii. execution application under Section 125 CrPC bearing No. CRM-309-2026 iii, a petition under the provisions of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 bearing No.COMA/207/2021 iv. a petition under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 bearing No.DMC/15/2021 7. On the other hand, the husband of the applicant-wife has filed the following petitions: i. a civil suit bearing No.884 of 2021 at District Charkhi Dadri. ii. CRR-53/2023 arising out of application filed under Section 125 CrPC at Charkhi Dadri. iii. Civil Suit i.e. CS/2969/2025 filed by respondent No.1 at Gharounda, District Karnal. iv. petition under Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 bearing No.HMA/44/2026 at Indri, District Karnal. 8. Apparently, the civil suit filed by respondent is not maintainable in the form of mandatory injunction when relief of recovery has been filed as no Court fee has been affixed on the valuation of the relief claimed. Be that as it may, in para 6 of the plaint, it has been pleaded that sum of Rs.50,000/- was taken by defendant Nos.1 and 2 whereas in total 13 defendants have been impleaded and thus, apparently, the suit appears to be a ploy to harass the defendants. 9. 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 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 TEJWINDER SINGH 2026.08.18 16:51 I agree to specified portions of this document 3 TA-622-2026 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.” 10. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, in the humble opinion of this Court, since 6 petitions are pending adjudication at Charkhi Dadri, therefore, it would be in the interest of both the parties that all their cases be heard together at the same place. Consequently the transfer application is allowed and the petition bearing No. CS/2969/2025, titled “Vinod Kumar Vs. Jyoti and Ors”, filed at the instance of respondent No.1 stands transferred from the Court of learned Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Gharaunda, District Karnal to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Charkhi Dadri. The requisite record of the aforesaid case be sent by the learned Family Court, Karnal to the Court concerned. 11. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. 13.08.2026 (HARKESH MANUJA) Tejwinder JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No TEJWINDER SINGH 2026.08.18 16:51 I agree to specified portions of this document