TA-235-202 IN THE HIG 111 Sonam Gaurav Kum CORAM: H Present: - NIDHI GUP 1. seeking trans Sonam’ (An Palwal Cam competent ju 2. been receive appearance o being decide 3. under: 2026 -1- E HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HA TA-23 Date o Versus v Kumar M: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDH Mr. Lovepreet Singh, Advocate I GUPTA, J. (ORAL) By way of filing the present pe g transfer of case bearing No. HMA/7 (Annexure P-3) pending before l Camp at Hodal, Sessions Divisio tent jurisdiction at Faridabad. As per office report, notice is eceived back served through his brothe rance on his behalf, despite service. decided in his absence. Learned counsel for the petitio i) Marriage of the petition solemnized on 25.02.201 ii) One son was born out o present in the care and cu iii) Due to matrimonial disc separately since 01.01.20 ND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 235-2026 Date of Decision: 20.05.2026 .… Petitioner .... Respondent NIDHI GUPTA vocate for the petitioner. sent petition, the petitioner-wife is MA/74/2024 titled as ‘Gaurav vs. efore the learned Family Court, Division, Palwal to a Court of tice issued to the respondent has brother. However, none has put in vice. Accordingly, this petition is petitioner, inter alia, submits as etitioner with the respondent was 2.2014. out of the said wedlock who is and custody of petitioner-mother. al discord the parties are residing .01.2022. RISHU KATARIA 2026.05.22 20:32 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. TA-235-202 4. allowed; and Sonam’ (An Camp at Ho competent ju 5. I have heard the case file petitioner. 6. sufficient gro established. rendered in 2026 -2- iv) There are 02 cases filed b are pending adjudicatio Faidabad; which are as un (a) Criminal Case arisi (Annexure P-1) reg 406, 498-A, 506, Station NIT, Fari and (b) Petition filed und grant of maintenan v) The petitioner has no residing along with mino vi) The distance between petitioner-wife i.e. Far proceedings filed by t Hodal is about 65 Kms. for her to frequently trav to attend the Court pro son. It is accordingly, prayed that and petition bearing No. HMA/7 ’ (Annexure P-3) pending before the at Hodal, Sessions Division, Palwal tent jurisdiction at Faridabad. No other argument has been ma heard learned counsel for the petition se file. I find merit in the submission Besides the facts as noticed h ent grounds for transfer, the legal posi ished. In this regard, judgment of ed in N.C.V. Aishwarya vs A.S. Sa filed by the petitioner-wife which dication before the Courts at e as under:- se arising out of FIR No. 209/2022 registered under Sections 323, , 506, 34 IPC at Women Police , Faridabad, District Faridabad; d under Section 125 Cr.P.C. for ntenance (Annexure P-2). s no source of income and is minor son at her parental house. een place of residence of the Faridabad and the place of by the respondent-husband at Kms. one side. It is very difficult ly travel from Faridabad to Hodal rt proceedings along with minor that the present petition may be MA/74/2024 titled as ‘Gaurav vs. re the learned Family Court, Palwal alwal be transferred to a Court of en made on behalf of the petitioner. etitioner and carefully gone through issions advanced on behalf of the iced hereinabove, which constitute al position in such like cases is well t of the Hon’ble Supreme Court .S. Saravana Karthik Sha,” 2022 . ugh the itute well ourt 022 RISHU KATARIA 2026.05.22 20:32 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. TA-235-202 Live Law (S held as unde 7. Singh vs Ku Kishor Bab Supreme C application, consideratio legal proce allowed, tak should desis 8. aforesaid pr considering 2026 -3- aw (SC) 627, is notable, wherein the under:- “9. The cardinal principle section 24 of the Code of Civil justice should demand the tra other proceeding. In matrimon are called upon to consider th have to take into consideratio both the parties, the social str behavioural pattern, their sta marriage and subsequent ther both the parties in eking out whose protective umbrella they to life. Given the prevailing so Indian society, generally, it is must be looked at while conside 10. Further, when two or mo different Courts between the common question of fact and la the cases are interdependent, it be tried together by the sa multiplicity in trial of the s decisions.” Further reliance can be placed u vs Kumar Sanjay, 2002 SC 396 and r Babulal Pardeshi, 2005(12) SCC me Court has observed that “w ion, the Courts are required to ration to the convenience of the fem roceedings from one Court to an , taking into consideration their c esist from putting female litigants un Even this Court in number aid principle of law. Accordingly, i ering the transfer of a matrimonial di ein the Hon’ble Supreme Court has ple for exercise of power under ivil Procedure is that the ends of e transfer of the suit, appeal or imonial matters, wherever Courts r the plea of transfer, the Courts ation the economic soundness of l strata of the spouses and their r standard of life prior to the thereto and the circumstances of out their livelihood and under they are seeking their sustenance g socioeconomic paradigm in the it is the wife's convenience which sidering transfer. r more proceedings are pending in the same parties which raise nd law, and when the decisions in nt, it is desirable that they should e same Judge so as to avoid he same issues and conflict of aced upon the judgments in Sumita and Rajani Kishor Pardeshivs ) SCC 237, wherein the Hon’ble “while deciding the transfer to give more weightage and e female litigants and transfer of o another should ordinarily be eir convenience and the Courts ts under undue hardships.” mber of cases has followed the ngly, it is well settled that while nial dispute/case, at the instance of has er of or rts rts of eir he of er ce he ch in ise in ld id of RISHU KATARIA 2026.05.22 20:32 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. TA-235-202 the wife, the custody of th health and convenience a male mem her place of travelling ex 9. Rajani Kish (supra) pa appropriate conditions: 10. to refer the exploring the 2026 -4- ife, the Court is to consider the fami y of the minor child, economic condi and earning capacity of the husba nience of the wife i.e. she cannot trave e member of her family, connectivity ace of residence as well as bearing ing expenses. In view of the judgments i.e. i Kishor Pardeshi’s case (supra) an ) passed by the Hon’ble Supreme riate to allow the present petition ions:- a) The petition HMA/74/2 Sonam’ (Annexure P-3) Family Court, Palwal Division, Palwal is tr competent jurisdiction at b) The learned District Ju transfer complete record case to District Judge, Fa c) The parties are directed t Judge, Faridabad on 22.0 d) The District Judge, Fari petition to the Court of co The concerned Court at Farida er the case before the Mediation a ing the possibility of some amicable se e family condition of the wife, the condition of the wife, her physical husband and most important the t travel alone without assistance of ctivity of the place to and fro from aring of the litigation charges and s i.e. Sumita Singh’s case (supra), ra) and N.C.V. Aishwarya’s case reme Court, this Court deems it etition, subject to the following A/74/2024 titled as ‘Gaurav vs. 3) pending before the learned lwal Camp at Hodal, Sessions is transferred to a Court of tion at Faridabad. ict Judge, Palwal is directed to record pertaining to the aforesaid Faridabad. ected to appear before the District 22.06.2026. Faridabad will assign the said rt of competent jurisdiction. Faridabad will make all endeavour tion and Conciliation Centre for able settlement between the parties. RISHU KATARIA 2026.05.22 20:32 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. TA-235-202 11. between the calendar mon 12. Bench of th Talwar; TA Singh; and 13. 14. 20.05.2026 rishu 2026 -5- The Court concerned, where en the parties, will accommodate t ar month. I am supported by the decision of this Court in TA No. 1315/20 r; TA No. 1322 of 2022, Jaswind ; and TA No. 1323 of 2022, Usha Ran The present petition stands disp Pending application(s), if any, s 2026 Whether speaking/reasoned Whether Reportable where the litigation is pending date them with one date in one ecisions rendered by a Co-ordinate 315/2022, Rohini Arora v Nitin aswinder Kaur v Gurvinderjeet a Rani v Karmajit Singh. disposed of, in the above terms. any, shall also stand disposed of. ( NIDHI GUPTA ) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No RISHU KATARIA 2026.05.22 20:32 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.