TA-696-2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 124 Meenu Bala Ashwani Kumar CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Present: - NIDHI GUPTA, J. (ORAL) 1. transfer of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 05.02.2026 pending before the learned Family Court, competent jurisdiction at 2. 2026 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH TA-69 Date of Decision: Meenu Bala Versus Ashwani Kumar CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Mr. Sanish Girdhar, Advocate for Mr. Kamal Gupta, Advocate for the NIDHI GUPTA, J. (ORAL) Prayer in this petition filed by the peti transfer of petition filed by the respondent the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 bearing No. 05.02.2026 (Annexure P-1) titled as ‘Ashwani Kumar before the learned Family Court, competent jurisdiction at Patti, Sessions Division Tarn Taran. Learned counsel for the petitioner i) Marriage of the petitioner with the respondent was solemnized on 08.02.2011 ii) Two sons were born out of the said wedlock presently in the care and custody of the respondent husband. iii) Due to matrimonial discord the parties are residing separately since 27.01.2026 iv) The petitioner has no source of income and her parents are suffering from old age ailments due to they are unable to accompany her to attend the proceedings at Amritsar. upon her old aged parents v) The distance between place of residence of the petitioner-wife i.e. Tarn Taran IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 696-2026 Date of Decision: 21.05.2026 .…Petitioner .... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NIDHI GUPTA Mr. Sanish Girdhar, Advocate for Mr. Kamal Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner. Prayer in this petition filed by the petitioner-wife is for respondent-husband under Section 13 of bearing No. HMA/210/2026 dated Ashwani Kumar vs. Meenu Bala, before the learned Family Court, Amritsar to a Court of Patti, Sessions Division Tarn Taran. Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, submits that :- Marriage of the petitioner with the respondent was 08.02.2011. born out of the said wedlock, who are presently in the care and custody of the respondent- Due to matrimonial discord the parties are residing 27.01.2026. has no source of income and her parents are suffering from old age ailments due to accompany her to attend the proceedings at Amritsar. She is totally dependent upon her old aged parents. The distance between place of residence of the Tarn Taran and the place of RISHU KATARIA 2026.05.26 09:18 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. TA-696-2026 3. allowed; and (Annexure P before the learned Family Court, Amritsar be transferred to a Court of competent jurisdiction at Patti, Sessions Division Tarn Taran 4. petitioner. petitioner. 5. employed as Head Constable in the Border Security Force (BSF) and at present is posted at Baramulla (Jammu and Kashmir). Moreover, admittedly, both the sons born out of the wedlock of the parties are in the care and custody of respondent respondent have to provide for the material needs of is also responsible for 6. respondent, the petitioner has no onerous parental house along with her parents. by the petitioner as to why she is unable to travel Kms. to Amritsar only on the dates of hearing 7. of transfer emanating from matrimonial disputes is in favour of the wife. 2026 -2- proceedings filed by the about 65 kilometers on one side. for her to frequently travel from Amritsar to attend the Court proceedings. It is accordingly, prayed that the present petition may be and petition bearing No. HMA/210/2026 dated 05.02.2026 (Annexure P-1) titled as ‘Ashwani Kumar before the learned Family Court, Amritsar be transferred to a Court of competent jurisdiction at Patti, Sessions Division Tarn Taran Heard. No other argument I find no merit in the submissions advanced on behalf of the Perusal of the record reveals that the respondent employed as Head Constable in the Border Security Force (BSF) and at present is posted at Baramulla (Jammu and Kashmir). Moreover, admittedly, both the sons born out of the wedlock of the parties are in the care and custody of respondent-husband. respondent have to provide for the material needs of is also responsible for their mental and physical welfare From the facts noted above, it is clear that unlike the respondent, the petitioner has no onerous responsibility parental house along with her parents. No cogent reason has been given by the petitioner as to why she is unable to travel Amritsar to attend to the proceedings only on the dates of hearing. This Court is well aware of the preponderance of law in cases of transfer emanating from matrimonial disputes is in favour of the wife. proceedings filed by the respondent at Amritsar is kilometers on one side. It is very difficult for her to frequently travel from Tarn Taran to attend the Court proceedings. It is accordingly, prayed that the present petition may be No. HMA/210/2026 dated 05.02.2026 Ashwani Kumar vs. Meenu Bala, pending before the learned Family Court, Amritsar be transferred to a Court of competent jurisdiction at Patti, Sessions Division Tarn Taran. is raised on behalf of the merit in the submissions advanced on behalf of the Perusal of the record reveals that the respondent-husband is employed as Head Constable in the Border Security Force (BSF) and at present is posted at Baramulla (Jammu and Kashmir). Moreover, admittedly, both the sons born out of the wedlock of the parties are in husband. Not only does the respondent have to provide for the material needs of the minor sons, but mental and physical welfare. From the facts noted above, it is clear that unlike the responsibility and is living at her No cogent reason has been given by the petitioner as to why she is unable to travel short distance of 65 to attend to the proceedings and that too not daily but This Court is well aware of the preponderance of law in cases of transfer emanating from matrimonial disputes is in favour of the wife. From the facts noted above, it is clear that unlike the at her No cogent reason has been given and that too not daily but This Court is well aware of the preponderance of law in cases of transfer emanating from matrimonial disputes is in favour of the wife. RISHU KATARIA 2026.05.26 09:18 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. TA-696-2026 However, in certain similar cases as the present one, the Hon’ble Supreme Court, as well as this Court have refused reli which may be referred to is: SrijitDas’ wherein Hon’ble Supreme Court under similar circumstances dismissed the wife’s application seeking transfer of petition filed by the husband. Reference Court where, in similar circumstances this Court had dismissed transfer applications filed on behalf of the wife. These are: Smt. Akhwinder Kaur Vs. Sh. Gurpreet Singh; 2019 Nisha alias Manisha vs. Amarveer Yadav. circumstances, where the minor child was with the husband, Supreme Court Vipul Solanki, (SC) 12.1.2026 has given precedence and preference to the convenience of the husband; and has dismissed prayer of the wife for transfer. 8. present case as noted above, as also the precedent finding no merit in this petition, the same is hereby 9. 21.05.2026 rishu 2026 -3- However, in certain similar cases as the present one, the Hon’ble Supreme Court, as well as this Court have refused reli which may be referred to is: (2006) 9 SCC 197 ’ wherein Hon’ble Supreme Court under similar circumstances dismissed the wife’s application seeking transfer of petition filed by the Reference in this regard may also be made to two cases of this Court where, in similar circumstances this Court had dismissed transfer applications filed on behalf of the wife. These are: Smt. Akhwinder Kaur Vs. Sh. Gurpreet Singh; 2019 Nisha alias Manisha vs. Amarveer Yadav. circumstances, where the minor child was with the husband, Supreme Court most recently in Vipul Changanlal Solank Vipul Solanki, (SC): Law Finder Doc Id # 2843797 has given precedence and preference to the convenience of the husband; and has dismissed prayer of the wife for transfer. Accordingly, in view of the facts and circumstances of the present case as noted above, as also the precedent finding no merit in this petition, the same is hereby Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. 21.05.2026 Whether speaking/reasoned Whether Reportable However, in certain similar cases as the present one, the Hon’ble Supreme Court, as well as this Court have refused relief to the wife. One such case (2006) 9 SCC 197 ‘Anindita Das Vs. ’ wherein Hon’ble Supreme Court under similar circumstances dismissed the wife’s application seeking transfer of petition filed by the in this regard may also be made to two cases of this Court where, in similar circumstances this Court had dismissed transfer applications filed on behalf of the wife. These are: TA no. 126 of 2018 Smt. Akhwinder Kaur Vs. Sh. Gurpreet Singh; and TA No. 299 of 2019 Nisha alias Manisha vs. Amarveer Yadav. In identical circumstances, where the minor child was with the husband, the Hon’ble Vipul Changanlal Solanki v. Nikita : Law Finder Doc Id # 2843797 decided on has given precedence and preference to the convenience of the husband; and has dismissed prayer of the wife for transfer. Accordingly, in view of the facts and circumstances of the present case as noted above, as also the precedents of Case law as above, finding no merit in this petition, the same is hereby dismissed. Pending application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. ( NIDHI GUPTA ) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No However, in certain similar cases as the present one, the Hon’ble Supreme ef to the wife. One such case ‘Anindita Das Vs. ’ wherein Hon’ble Supreme Court under similar circumstances dismissed the wife’s application seeking transfer of petition filed by the in this regard may also be made to two cases of this Court where, in similar circumstances this Court had dismissed transfer TA no. 126 of 2018 of In identical the Hon’ble i v. Nikita decided on has given precedence and preference to the convenience of the Accordingly, in view of the facts and circumstances of the s of Case law as above, RISHU KATARIA 2026.05.26 09:18 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.