TA-93-2026 IN THE HIG 205 Reha Amit Kumar CORAM: Present: - NIDHI GUP 1. seeking tran 13of the Hin HMA/40/202 before the le a Court of co 2. one is appea as well. Acco 3. under: 2026 -1- HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HA TA-9 Date o Versus Kumar M: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDH Mr. Navmohit Singh, Advocate None for the respondent. I GUPTA, J. (ORAL) By way of filing the present pe transfer of petition filed by respon he Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for s /40/2025 (Annexure P-1) titled as ‘Am the learned Family Court, Camp at rt of competent jurisdiction at Panchku Though notice has been served appearing on his behalf today as well . Accordingly, this petition is being de Learned counsel for the petitio i) that the parties solemnize ii) that one daughter is born 07.09.2025 who is presen the care and custody of th D HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 93-2026 Date of Decision: 13.05.2026 .…Petitioner .... Respondent NIDHI GUPTA vocate for the petitioner. sent petition, the petitioner-wife is espondent-husband under Section (for short-‘the Act’) bearing No. Amit Kumar vs. Reha’ pending p at Nangal, District Rupnagar to nchkula. served upon the respondent but no s well as on the last date of hearing eing decided in his absence. petitioner, inter alia, submits as mnized marriage on 20.04.2023. is born out of the said wedlock on presently 08 months old and is in y of the petitioner-wife. RISHU KATARIA 2026.05.14 19:55 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. TA-93-2026 4. case, as deta 5. petitioner. 2026 -2- iii) that due to matrimonial d separately. The petition daughter is residing at Ka iv) that there are 03 cases which are pending adjud Kalka, District Panchkula (a) Petition under Sec MNT-125-13-2025 (b) Second petition un on behalf of minor 125-100-2025 (An (c) Complaint under Protection of Wom Act, bearing No. P-4). v) that petitioner has no in and the respondent-husb to the petitioner or maintenance. vi) that distance between is about 90 kilometers difficult for her to unde case from Kalka to Nang It is on these grounds that petiti s detailed in para 3 above. No other argument has bee I have heard learned counsel an onial discord the parties are living etitioner along with the minor at Kalka. cases filed by the petitioner-wife adjudication before the Courts at chkula, which are as under:- er Section 125 Cr.P.C. bearing No. 2025 (Annexure P-2). ion under Section 125 Cr.P.C. filed minor daughter bearing No. MNT- 5 (Annexure P-3); and under the provisions of the f Women from Domestic Violence g No. COMA/1/2026 (Annexure independent source of income husband is not paying anything r or the minor child towards een the place of Nangal to Kalka eters on one side. As such, it is undertake frequent travel for the o Nangal along with minor child. t petitioner prays for transfer of the been raised on behalf of the and carefully gone through the the the RISHU KATARIA 2026.05.14 19:55 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. TA-93-2026 case file. In the submissi 6. sufficient gro established. rendered in Live Law (S held as unde 7. Singh vs Ku Kishor Bab Supreme C application, consideratio 2026 -3- n view of the undisputed facts bmissions advanced on behalf of the 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 aw (SC) 627, is notable, wherein the s 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 Babulal Pardeshi, 2005(12) SCC me Court has observed that “w ion, the Courts are required to ration to the convenience of the fem as noted above, I find merit in the petitioner. iced hereinabove, which constitute al position in such like cases is well t of the Hon’ble Supreme Court .S. Saravana Karthik Sha,” 2022 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 it in itute well ourt 022 has er of or rts rts of eir he of er ce he ch in ise in ld id of RISHU KATARIA 2026.05.14 19:55 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. TA-93-2026 legal proce allowed, tak should desis 8. aforesaid pr considering the wife, the custody of th health and convenience a male mem her place of travelling ex 9. Rajani Kish (supra) pass appropriate conditions: 2026 -4- roceedings from one Court to an , taking into consideration their c esist from putting female litigants u Even this Court in number aid principle of law. Accordingly, i ering the transfer of a matrimonial di 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. Kishor Pardeshi’s case (supra) an ) passed by the Hon’ble Supreme riate to allow the present petition ions:- a) The petition (Annexure husband under Section HMA/40/2025(Annexure vs. Reha’ pending before Camp at Nangal, Distri competent jurisdiction at 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 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 xure P-1) filed by respondent- ection 13of Act, bearing No. nexure P-1) titled as ‘Amit Kumar before the learned Family Court, District Rupnagar to a Court of tion at Panchkula. RISHU KATARIA 2026.05.14 19:55 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. TA-93-2026 10. to refer the exploring the 11. between the calendar mon 12. Bench of th Talwar; TA Singh; and 13. 14. 13.05.2026 rishu 2026 -5- b) The learned District Jud transfer complete record case to District Judge, Pa c) The parties are directed t Judge, Panchkula on 15.0 d) The District Judge, Pan petition to the Court of co The concerned Court at Panch er the case before the Mediation a ing the possibility of some amicable se 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 ct Judge, Rupnagar is directed to record pertaining to the aforesaid Panchkula. ected to appear before the District 15.06.2026. Panchkula will assign the said rt of competent jurisdiction. Panchkula will make all endeavour tion and Conciliation Centre for able settlement between the parties. 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 2026.05.14 19:55 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.