2026:HHC:37347 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CMPMO No.  :   487 of 2024 Decided on     :    01.09.2026 Sapna Kumari …Petitioner Versus Brahmi Devi & Others …Respondents Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner       :  Mr. Rajiv Sirkeck, Advocate. For the respondent    : Mr. Rohit,   Advocate   vice   Mr. Rahil Mahajan,   Advocate,   for   respondent No.1. None for respondents No.2 and 3. Virender Singh, Judge (Oral) Petitioner–Sapna   Kumari   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 Case No.15 of 2022, titled as Brahmi Devi versus Sapna Kumari & Others, instituted by 1 Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. 2 2026:HHC:37347 respondent No.1­mother­in­law  of  the  petitioner,  before  the Court   of   learned   Additional   Chief   Judicial   Magistrate, Palampur,   District   Kangra,   to   the   Court   of   Chief   Judicial Magistrate, Shimla, District Shimla, H.P. 2. According to the petitioner, she was married to the son of respondent No.1 and out of the matrimonial discord between   the   petitioner   and   her   husband   and   his   family members, she had initiated proceedings under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, against them, including respondent No.1, which is pending adjudication   before   the   Court   of   learned   Chief   Judicial Magistrate   Shimla. The   petitioner   has   also   initiated proceedings under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C., on behalf of the minor   daughter,   which   is   pending   adjudication   before   the learned District Judge, Family Court, Shimla. 3. As per the petitioner, respondent No.1 has filed a case,   under   Section   12   of   the   Protection   of   Women   from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, against the petitioner and her parents, which is pending adjudication, before the Court of learned   Additional   Chief   Judicial   Magistrate,   Palampur, 3 2026:HHC:37347 which   seems   to   be   the   counter   blast   to   the   proceedings initiated by the petitioner, just to harass her and her family members. 4. According to the petitioner, it is not possible for her to attend the case at Palampur, as, there is no one to look after her minor daughter, as well as, it is very difficult for her to bear the travelling and staying expenses at Palampur. The petitioner is having no source of income, as she is unemployed, and totally dependent upon her parents. 5. According to the petitioner­wife, her husband has also filed two cases against her at Palampur one under Section 26 of the Hindu Minority and Guardinnship Act and another under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act and the petitioner has   already   filed   separate   petitions,   before   this   Court   for transfer of both the case to Shimla. 6. On the basis of the above facts, a prayer has been made to allow the petition. 7. Heard. 8. Reply to the petition has been filed on behalf of respondent   No.1,   wherein   the   prayer   for   transfer   of   the 4 2026:HHC:37347 petition has been opposed, on the ground that mere vague allegations, assumptions, or unsupported statements are not sufficient to justify the transfer of a pending case. Hence, a prayer has been made to dismiss the petition. 9. Along with the present petition, the petitioner­wife has annexed the photocopy of Order dated 24.07.2024, passed by the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Palampur. 10. 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:37347 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) 11. Being   guided   by   the   above   decision   and considering the fact that the convenience of the petitioner­wife is paramount consideration, in such type of matters, this Court is of the view that the present petition is liable to be allowed. 12. Consequently, the petition is allowed and the case bearing  Case  No.15 of 2022, titled as  Brahmi Devi  versus Sapna Kumari & Others, pending adjudication before the Court   of   learned   Additional   Chief   Judicial   Magistrate, 6 2026:HHC:37347 Palampur,   District   Kangra   is   transferred   to   the   Court   of learned Chief Judicial  Magistrate,  Shimla, District Shimla, H.P. 13. Learned   Chief   Judicial   Magistrate,   Shimla, District Shimla, H.P., is requested to proceed further, after securing the presence of both the parties. 14. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. 15. A copy of this order be sent to the Court of learned Additional   Chief   Judicial   Magistrate,   Palampur,   District Kangra, as well as, to the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shimla, District Shimla H.P., for compliance. ( Virender Singh ) September 01, 2026( ps ) Judge