2026:HHC:25119 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CMPMO No.    :      807 of 2025 Decided on    :  25 th   June, 2026 Bharti Azad …Petitioner Versus Mukesh Kumar …Respondent Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner       : Ms. Shivani Tegta, Advocate. For the respondent    : Ms. Menka   Raj   Chauhan, Advocate. Virender Singh, Judge (Oral) Petitioner–Bharti   Azad   has   approached   this Court, by way of the present petition, under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter referred to as ‘the CPC’), seeking transfer of case, bearing HMA No.225 of 2025, titled as   Mukesh   Kumar   versus   Bharti   Azad,   instituted   by   the respondent­husband   before   the   Court   of   learned   Principal Judge, Family Court, Shimla, District Shimla to the Court of 1 Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. 2 2026:HHC:25119 learned   Additional   District   and   Sessions   Judge,   Rohru, District Shimla, H.P. 2. According to the petitioner­wife, she was married to respondent­husband, on 11.03.2020, as per Hindu rites and rituals and out of the said wedlock, the parties to the lis have been blessed with a son namely Atharv Zinta. 3. As   per   the   petitioner­wife,   the   respondent­ husband has filed a divorce petition, under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’), before the Court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Shimla, District Shimla, H.P. 4. According   to   the   petitioner­wife,   presently,   she, along   with   her   minor   son,   is   residing   in   a   rental accommodation   at   Jubbal. According   to   her,   the   distance between her residence and Shimla is about 100 kilometers. Being a single mother, it is difficult for her to visit/attend the hearing   in   the   case   pending   before   the   Court   of   learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Shimla. 5. It is the further case of the petitioner­wife that she had instituted a petition under Section 12 of the Protection of 3 2026:HHC:25119 Women   from   Domestic   Violence   Act,   before   the   learned Additional   Chief   Judicial   Magistrate,   Court   No.1,   Rohru, Camp   at   Jubbal,   in   which,   maintenance   of   Rs.4,000/­   per month has been awarded in favour of the minor son vide order dated   5.5.2025. Order   dated   5.5.2025,   has   also   been challenged   by   the   respondent­husband,   which   is   pending adjudication before the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rohru, District Shimla. 6. On the basis of the above facts, a prayer has been made to allow the petition. 7. Heard. 8. Along with the present petition, the petitioner­wife has   annexed   the   photocopy   of   the   petition,   filed   by   the respondent­husband, under Section 13 of the Act. 9. Considering the stand, as taken in the petition, the petitioner was forced to contest the above titled petition, which   is   pending   adjudication   before   the   Court   of   learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Shimla, District Shimla, H.P., whereas, she is resident at Jubbal, and the distance between 4 2026:HHC:25119 the   residence   of   the   petitioner   and   the   Court,   where   the matter is pending, is pleaded as 100 kilometers. 10. It is no longer res integra that the convenience of the wife is paramount consideration, in such type of matters, as such, the petitioner cannot be forced to  contest the petition, by visiting the Court at Shimla, which is about 100 kilometers from her residence. Therefore, in the considered opinion of this Court the prayer, as made in the petition, deserves to be allowed. 11. Consequently, the petition is allowed and the case bearing  HMA   No.225   of   2025,   titled   as  Mukesh   Kumar versus Bharti Azad, pending adjudication before the Court of learned   Principal   Judge,   Family   Court,   Shimla,   District Shimla, H.P., is transferred to the Court of learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Rohru, District Shimla, H.P. 12. Learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Rohru, District Shimla, H.P., is requested to proceed further, after securing the presence of both the parties. 13. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. 5 2026:HHC:25119 14. A copy of this order be sent to the Court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Shimla, District Shimla, H.P., as well as, to the Court of learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Rohru, District Shimla, H.P., for compliance. ( Virender Singh ) June 25, 2026( ps ) Judge