2026:HHC:35449 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CMPMO No.   :       148 of 2026 Decided on : 20 th   August, 2026 Mamta …Petitioner Versus Raman …Respondent Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner       : Mr. Karam Pal, Advocate. For the respondent    : Mr. Ashwani   Sharma,   Senior Advocate   with   Mr. Ishan Sharma, Advocate. Virender Singh, Judge (Oral) Petitioner–Mamta 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 Petition No.164 of 2025, titled as  Raman  versus  Mamta,  instituted   by   the   respondent­ husband,   before   the   Court   of   learned   Additional   Principal Judge, Family Court, Dehra, District Kangra, to the Court of 1 Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. 2 2026:HHC:35449 Principal Judge, Family Court, Hamirpur, District Hamirpur, H.P. 2. According to the petitioner­wife, she was married to respondent­husband, on 27.06.2023, as per Hindu rites and rituals and thereafter, they started living as husband and wife in the matrimonial home. Out of the said wedlock, they have been blessed with a son. Thereafter, the behaviour of the respondent­husband   suddenly   changed   and   he   had   started maltreating, teasing and taunting the petitioner­wife. 3. As   per   the   petitioner­wife,   respondent­husband always   demanded   dowry   articles   and   money   from   the petitioner and whenever, the petitioner showed her inability to give money and dowry articles, then, she was given beatings by the respondent. According to her, she tolerated all the inhumane and cruel acts of the respondent with the hope that good   sense   will   prevail   upon   him   and   he   will   mend   his behaviour with the passage of time, but, of no avail. 4. According   to   the   petitioner­wife,   thereafter,   she had   filed   a   petition  under   Section   13   (1)(ia)   of   the   Hindu Marriage   Act   (hereinafter   referred   to   as   the   Act),   for 3 2026:HHC:35449 dissolution of marriage before the Court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Hamirpur, District Hamirpur. 5. According to the petitioner­wife, she is a Forest Guard, in the Forest Department and her meagre income is wholly insufficient to maintain herself and the minor child, especially in view of the rising cost of living, medical expenses and child care requirements. 6. According  to  the  petitioner­wife,   the  respondent had filed a petition, under Section 9 of the Act, for restitution of   Conjugal   Rights   before   the   learned   Additional   Principal Judge, Family Court, Dehra, District Kangra. According to her, she is not financially strong and the respondent is not maintaining her. 7. On the basis of the above facts, a prayer has been made to allow the petition. 8. Heard. 9. Reply to the petition has not been filed, despite opportunity   granted,   however,   the   prayer   as   made   in   the petition has been opposed by tooth and nail. 4 2026:HHC:35449 10. Along with the present petition, the petitioner­wife has   annexed   the   photocopy   of   the   petition,   filed   by   the respondent­husband, under Section 9 of the Act. 11. The   respondent­husband,   has   not   filed   reply   to controvert the allegations, which have been levelled in the transfer application, but, opposed the prayer, as made, in the petition. 12. The   Hon’ble   Supreme   Court   in  Civil   Appeal No.4894 of 2022 (Arising out of S.L.P.© No.16465 of 2021), titled as N.C.V. Aishwarya versus A.S. Saravana Karthik Sha,   has   held   that   given  the   prevailing   socio­economic paradigm in the Indian Society, it is the wife’s convenience, which must be looked at, while considering transfer. It is apt for   this   Court   to   reproduce   paragraphs   9   and   10   of   the judgment, as under :­ “9. The   cardinal   principle   for   exercise   of  power under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure is that the ends of justice should demand the transfer 5 2026:HHC:35449 of   the   suit,   appeal   or   other   proceeding. In matrimonial matters, wherever Courts are called upon to consider the plea of transfer, the Courts have   to   take   into   consideration   the   economic soundness of both the parties, the social strata of the spouses and their behavioural pattern, their standard   of   life   prior   to   the   marriage   and subsequent thereto and the circumstances of both the parties in eking out their livelihood and under whose protective umbrella they are seeking their sustenance   to   life. Given   the   prevailing   socio­ economic   paradigm   in   the   Indian   society, generally, it is the wife’s convenience which must be looked at while considering transfer. 10. Further,   when   two   or  more   proceedings   are pending   in   different   Courts   between   the   same parties which raise common question of fact and law,   and   when   the   decisions   in   the   cases   are interdependent, it is desirable that they should be tried together by the same Judge so as to avoid multiplicity in trial of the same issues and conflict of decisions.” (self emphasis supplied) 13. Being   guided   by   the   above   decision   and considering the fact that the convenience of the respondent­ wife   is   paramount   consideration,   in   such   type   of   matters, coupled   with   the   fact   that   whatsoever   pleaded   by   the petitioner­wife, in the petition, remained uncontroverted,  this Court is of the view that the present petition is liable to be allowed. 6 2026:HHC:35449 14. Consequently, the petition is allowed and the case bearing  HMA Petition No.164 of 2025,  titled as  Raman versus  Mamta,   pending   adjudication   before   the   Court   of learned   Additional   Principal   Judge,   Family   Court,   Dehra, District   Kangra   is   transferred   to   the   Court   of   learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Hamirpur, District Hamirpur, H.P. 15. Learned   Principal   Judge,   Family   Court, Hamirpur, District Hamirpur, H.P., is requested to proceed further, after securing the presence of both the parties. 16. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. 17. A copy of this order be sent to the Court of learned Additional   Principal   Judge,   Family   Court,   Dehra,   District Kangra, as well as, to the Court of learned Principal Judge, Family   Court,   Hamirpur,   District   Hamirpur,   H.P.,   for compliance. ( Virender Singh ) August 20, 2026( ps ) Judge