TA No.809 of 2026 (O&M) TA No.809 of 2026 (O&M) TA No.809 of 2026 (O&M) TA No.809 of 2026 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA 112 BIJ BIJ BIJ BIJIIIINDER SHARMA NDER SHARMA NDER SHARMA NDER SHARMA Vs Vs Vs Vs SMT. SHEELA SMT. SHEELA SMT. SHEELA SMT. SHEELA CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE Present: Ms. Malvika Chauhan Mr. Anil Shukla, Advocate for the applicant HARKESH MANUJA, J. (Oral) HARKESH MANUJA, J. (Oral) HARKESH MANUJA, J. (Oral) HARKESH MANUJA, J. (Oral) [1]. By way of present transfer of Civil Civil Civil Civil pending in the Court of Sh. to the learned Court of competent jurisdiction at Gurugram or Palwal [2]. I have heard learned counsel for the paper book. [3]. In the present application, the sole ground raised at the instance of the applicant is that one Sanju wife of Late Sh. Praveen @ Bablu, who happens to be the daughter-in- Faridabad and threatening the applicant of dire consequences. [4]. In the present facts and circumstances, it has not been disclosed in the application as to since when Sanju wife of Late Sh. Praveen @ Bablu, (daughter in-law of the respondent) is working in the house of Moreover, on a specif TA No.809 of 2026 (O&M) TA No.809 of 2026 (O&M) TA No.809 of 2026 (O&M) TA No.809 of 2026 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH AT CHANDIGARH AT CHANDIGARH AT CHANDIGARH Transfer Application No. Transfer Application No. Transfer Application No. Transfer Application No. Date of Decision: Date of Decision: Date of Decision: Date of Decision: NDER SHARMA NDER SHARMA NDER SHARMA NDER SHARMA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJ HARKESH MANUJ HARKESH MANUJ HARKESH MANUJ Ms. Malvika Chauhan, Advocate for Mr. Anil Shukla, Advocate for the applicant. **** HARKESH MANUJA, J. (Oral) HARKESH MANUJA, J. (Oral) HARKESH MANUJA, J. (Oral) HARKESH MANUJA, J. (Oral) By way of present application, prayer has been made for Civil Civil Civil Civil Appeal No. Appeal No. Appeal No. Appeal No.460 of 2025 460 of 2025 460 of 2025 460 of 2025 titled pending in the Court of Sh. Purushottam Kumar to the learned Court of competent jurisdiction at Gurugram or Palwal I have heard learned counsel for the In the present application, the sole ground raised at the instance of the applicant is that one Sanju wife of Late Sh. Praveen @ Bablu, who happens to be -law of the respondent, is working in the house d and threatening the applicant of dire consequences. In the present facts and circumstances, it has not been disclosed in the application as to since when Sanju wife of Late Sh. Praveen @ Bablu, (daughter law of the respondent) is working in the house of Moreover, on a specific query, it has been informed that the proceedings arising IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH AT CHANDIGARH AT CHANDIGARH AT CHANDIGARH Transfer Application No. Transfer Application No. Transfer Application No. Transfer Application No. 809 809 809 809 of 202 of 202 of 202 of 2026 6 6 6 (O&M) (O&M) (O&M) (O&M) Date of Decision: Date of Decision: Date of Decision: Date of Decision: 15 15 15 15.07.2026 .07.2026 .07.2026 .07.2026 ...... ...... ...... ......Applicant Applicant Applicant Applicant …..Respond …..Respond …..Respond …..Responden en en enttttssss HARKESH MANUJ HARKESH MANUJ HARKESH MANUJ HARKESH MANUJAAAA for , prayer has been made for seeking ‘Smt. Sheela Vs. Bijinder Sharma Purushottam Kumar, Additional Civil Judge, Faridabad to the learned Court of competent jurisdiction at Gurugram or Palwal. I have heard learned counsel for the applicant and gone through the In the present application, the sole ground raised at the instance of the applicant is that one Sanju wife of Late Sh. Praveen @ Bablu, who happens to be law of the respondent, is working in the house of judicial officer at d and threatening the applicant of dire consequences. In the present facts and circumstances, it has not been disclosed in the application as to since when Sanju wife of Late Sh. Praveen @ Bablu, (daughter law of the respondent) is working in the house of the learned judicial officer. informed that the proceedings arising 1 seeking Smt. Sheela Vs. Bijinder Sharma’ Faridabad and gone through the In the present application, the sole ground raised at the instance of the applicant is that one Sanju wife of Late Sh. Praveen @ Bablu, who happens to be of judicial officer at In the present facts and circumstances, it has not been disclosed in the application as to since when Sanju wife of Late Sh. Praveen @ Bablu, (daughter- judicial officer. informed that the proceedings arising MOHMED ATIK 2026.07.16 14:27 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment TA No.809 of 2026 (O&M) TA No.809 of 2026 (O&M) TA No.809 of 2026 (O&M) TA No.809 of 2026 (O&M) out of the said civil suit judice with the same judicial officer in whose house Sanju is working. [5]. Besides it, there is no averment m any kind of influence used by the said judicial officer at the behest of said Sanju wife of Late Sh. Praveen @ Bablu, (daughter the outcome of litigation parties based on agreement dated 10.06.2014 is pending since 2017; even the suit for specific performance filed on behalf of the applicant was decreed by the learned Trial Court vide ex parte judgment and decree dated 11.11.2 by the execution of sale deed in of execution application. [6]. In such circumstances, once there are no against any kind of interference in the pending litigation b whose house Sanju wife of Late Sh. Praveen @ Bablu, (daughter respondent) has been working, the same cannot be a ground to transfer the civil litigation pending in the [7]. In applicants-defendants [8]. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. July July July July 15 15 15 15, , , , 20 20 20 2026 26 26 26 Atik Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable TA No.809 of 2026 (O&M) TA No.809 of 2026 (O&M) TA No.809 of 2026 (O&M) TA No.809 of 2026 (O&M) out of the said civil suit, pending between the applicant and respondent are not with the same judicial officer in whose house Sanju is working. Besides it, there is no averment m any kind of influence used by the said judicial officer at the behest of said Sanju wife of Late Sh. Praveen @ Bablu, (daughter-in the outcome of litigation. It may also be noticed here t based on agreement dated 10.06.2014 is pending since 2017; even the suit for specific performance filed on behalf of the applicant was decreed by the learned Trial Court vide ex parte judgment and decree dated 11.11.2 by the execution of sale deed in respect of the subject property through the process of execution application. In such circumstances, once there are no against any kind of interference in the pending litigation b whose house Sanju wife of Late Sh. Praveen @ Bablu, (daughter respondent) has been working, the same cannot be a ground to transfer the civil pending in the Court at Faridabad. view of above, the application defendants being devoid of merits is, thus dismissed. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed (HARKESH MANUJA) (HARKESH MANUJA) (HARKESH MANUJA) (HARKESH MANUJA) Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No pending between the applicant and respondent are not sub with the same judicial officer in whose house Sanju is working. Besides it, there is no averment made in the entire application about any kind of influence used by the said judicial officer at the behest of said Sanju in-law of the respondent) affecting . It may also be noticed here that the litigation between the based on agreement dated 10.06.2014 is pending since 2017; even the suit for specific performance filed on behalf of the applicant was decreed by the learned Trial Court vide ex parte judgment and decree dated 11.11.2024 followed respect of the subject property through the process In such circumstances, once there are no substantial allegations against any kind of interference in the pending litigation by the judicial officer in whose house Sanju wife of Late Sh. Praveen @ Bablu, (daughter-in-law of the respondent) has been working, the same cannot be a ground to transfer the civil view of above, the application preferred at the instance of the , thus dismissed. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed (HARKESH MANUJA) (HARKESH MANUJA) (HARKESH MANUJA) (HARKESH MANUJA) JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No 2 sub- ade in the entire application about any kind of influence used by the said judicial officer at the behest of said Sanju affecting hat the litigation between the based on agreement dated 10.06.2014 is pending since 2017; even the suit for specific performance filed on behalf of the applicant was decreed by the followed respect of the subject property through the process allegations y the judicial officer in law of the respondent) has been working, the same cannot be a ground to transfer the civil preferred at the instance of the Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed MOHMED ATIK 2026.07.16 14:27 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment