TA-590-2026 (O&M) --1-- 111 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH TA-590-2026 (O&M) Decided on:-13.07.2026 Anjali ….Applicant. vs. Himanshu ….Respondent. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA Present: Mr. D.S. Virk, Advocate for the applicant. Mr.Devinder Singh, Advocate for the respondent. ***** HARKESH MANUJA J. (Oral) 1. The applicant-wife, by way of present application, seeks transfer of petition bearing No.27/2026 (Annexure P-1), titled “Himanshu vs. Smt. Anjali”, filed under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter to be referred as “1955 Act”) at the instance of respondent-husband; from the Court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Rohtak to the competent Court of jurisdiction at Sirsa. 2. Briefly stating, the marriage between the applicant and respondent was solemnized on 28.08.2024; on account of matrimonial discord between the parties, the above mentioned petition under Section 9 of the 1955 Act, came to be preferred at the instance of respondent-husband. Thereupon, the present application seeking transfer thereof came to be filed by the applicant-wife. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant, inter alia, contends that the SONIKA 2026.07.15 09:52 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document TA-590-2026 (O&M) --2-- applicant-wife has also filed a petition bearing No.MNT/2/2026 under Section 144 BNSS for grant of maintenance before the ld. Principal Judge, Family Court, Sirsa. It is submitted that the applicant is residing at her parental home at Sirsa. Accordingly, a prayer is made for transfer of the above mentioned petition filed at the instance of respondent-husband from Family Court, Rohtak to Family Court, Sirsa. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent vehemently opposes the prayer made on behalf of the applicant. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the paper-book. 6. In the present case, admittedly, the applicant-wife has filed a petition under Section 144 of BNSS, which is pending adjudication before the learned Family Court at Sirsa. 7. As per the averments made in the present transfer application, the applicant-wife has no independent source of income and is solely dependent on her parents. Moreover, the distance from Rohtak to Sirsa is approximately 200 Kms. 8. Furthermore, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in its decision rendered in “Manjula Singh Chouhan Versus Vishal Singh Chouhan”, reported as 2019 (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. Relevant paragraphs No. 3 to 5 thereof are reproduced hereunder:- “3. As per the submission of the appellant, two cases are already pending in Family Court, Bhopal, and it will be in the interests of both the parties to try all their cases in Bhopal. Learned counsel for the respondent however, submits that it will suit to the appellant only, therefore, transfer may SONIKA 2026.07.15 09:52 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document TA-590-2026 (O&M) --3-- not be permitted. The fact remains that the respondent has to travel to Bhopal for conduct of other cases pending in Family Court, Bhopal. 4. We are of the view that it will be in the interests of both the parties that all their cases be heard together by the same Court. 5. Therefore, H.M.A. Case No.71/2016 is transferred from Family Court, Indore to the Family Court, Bhopal.” 9. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, in the humble opinion of this Court, since a maintenance petition under Section 144 BNSS is pending adjudication at Sirsa, therefore, it would be in the interest of both the parties that all their cases be heard together at the same place. Consequently the transfer application is allowed and the petition under Section 9 of the 1955 Act i.e. bearing No.27/2026, titled “Himanshu vs. Smt. Anjali”, filed by the respondent-husband, stands transferred from the Court of ld. Principal Judge, Family Court, Rohtak to the Family Court, Sirsa. The requisite record of the aforesaid case be sent by the learned Court, Rohtak to the Court concerned. 10. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed off. 13.07.2026 (HARKESH MANUJA) sonika JUDGE (i) Whether speaking/reasoned: Yes/No (ii) Whether reportable: Yes/ No SONIKA 2026.07.15 09:52 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document