1 117 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH ANJU NARWAL SUDHANSHU CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Present: Mr. Antriskh Sharma, Mr. Sachin Mittal, Advocate for respondent (through video conferencing). HARKESH MANUJA CM-10333-CII-2026 Allowed as prayed for, subject to all just CM-10334-CII-2026 Allowed as prayed for, subject to all just exceptions medical report is taken on record as Annexures P MAIN CASE [1] The petitioner bearing HMA No Anju Narwal”, filed under Section 13 (hereinafter to be referred as “divorce petition”) at the instance of respondent husband; from the Court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court, to the Court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Gohana. [2] Briefly stating, the marriage between the petitioner and respondent was solemnized on 09.11.2019 parties, the above mentioned divorce petition came to be preferred at the TA- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: ANJU NARWAL Versus HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA Mr. Antriskh Sharma, Advocate for the Mr. Sachin Mittal, Advocate for respondent (through video conferencing). **** HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL) 2026 Allowed as prayed for, subject to all just 2026 Allowed as prayed for, subject to all just exceptions medical report is taken on record as Annexures P The petitioner-wife, by way of present application, seeks transfer of case bearing HMA No. 1013 of 2024, dated 15.07. ”, filed under Section 13(1) (ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter to be referred as “divorce petition”) at the instance of respondent husband; from the Court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court, to the Court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Briefly stating, the marriage between the petitioner and respondent was 09.11.2019; on account of matrimonial discord between the parties, the above mentioned divorce petition came to be preferred at the -1611-2025 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH TA-1611-2025 (O&M) Date of Decision: July 03, 2026 ........Petitioner ........Respondent HARKESH MANUJA Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Sachin Mittal, Advocate for respondent Allowed as prayed for, subject to all just exceptions. Allowed as prayed for, subject to all just exceptions and medical report is taken on record as Annexures P-14 and P-15. wife, by way of present application, seeks transfer of case .2024, titled “Sudhanashu Vs. of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter to be referred as “divorce petition”) at the instance of respondent- husband; from the Court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Gurugram, to the Court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Sonipat, Camp Court at Briefly stating, the marriage between the petitioner and respondent was ; on account of matrimonial discord between the parties, the above mentioned divorce petition came to be preferred at the (O&M) July 03, 2026 Petitioner and wife, by way of present application, seeks transfer of case Vs. of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 - , at Briefly stating, the marriage between the petitioner and respondent was ; on account of matrimonial discord between the parties, the above mentioned divorce petition came to be preferred at the TEJWINDER SINGH 2026.07.06 17:06 I agree to specified portions of this document 2 TA-1611-2025 (O&M) instance of respondent-husband. Thereafter, the present application seeking its transfer came to be filed by the petitioner-wife. [3] Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that the distance between Gurugram and Gohana is approximately 112 kilometers and given the fact that petitioner-wife is suffering from Ovarian Cancer, it would be inconvenient for her to travel to Gurugram on every date. Learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that the petitioner-wife has got registered an FIR No.280 dated 28.09.2024 registered under Sections 323, 377, 406, 498-A and 506 IPC at Police Station Barauda, District Sonipat. Accordingly, a prayer is made for transfer of the above mentioned divorce petition filed at the instance of respondent-husband from Family Court, Gurugram, to the Family Court, Sonipat, Camp Court at Gohana. [4] On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent vehemently opposes the prayer made on behalf of the petitioner. [5] I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the paper-book. [6] In the present case, admittedly, the petitioner-wife has registered an FIR bearing No.280 dated 28.09.2024 registered under Sections 323, 377, 406, 498-A and 506 IPC at Police Station Barauda, District Sonipat. Moreover, the medical report (Annexures P-14 and P-15) produced on record makes it amply patent that the petitioner-wife is suffering from a severe ailment of Ovarian Cancer. [7] According to the averments in the application, Gurugram and Gohana are situated at a distance of about 112 kilometres. For the petitioner-wife, who has no independent source of income and is already suffering from cancer, the financial and physical toll of travelling for every hearing would add insult to the injury. [8] Furthermore, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in its decision rendered in “Manjula Singh Chouhan Versus Vishal Singh Chouhan”, reported as 2019 TEJWINDER SINGH 2026.07.06 17:06 I agree to specified portions of this document 3 TA-1611-2025 (O&M) (13) SCC 660 held that, in the interest of both the parties, all connected matrimonial proceedings should ordinarily be heard by the same Court and, accordingly, allowed the transfer application therein. [9] Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, in the humble opinion of this Court, it would be in the interest of both the parties that all their cases be heard together by the same Court. Consequently the transfer application is allowed and the divorce petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act i.e. HMA/1013/2024, titled “Sudhanshu Vs. Anju Narwal”, filed by the respondent-husband, stands transferred from the Family Court, Gurugram to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Family Court, Sonipat, Camp Court at Gohana. The requisite record of the aforesaid case be sent by the Family Court, Gurugram to the Court concerned. [10] Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. 03.07.2026 (HARKESH MANUJA) Tejwinder JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No TEJWINDER SINGH 2026.07.06 17:06 I agree to specified portions of this document