TA No.137 of 2026 293 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA Sangeeta Vs Ankur CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH Present: Mr. for the Mr. Rahul for the respondent. HARKESH MANUJA, J. (Oral) The applicant divorce petition bearing no. filed under Section 13 to be referred as “ husband; from the Court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Camp at Bahadurgarh [2] Briefly stating, the marriage between the respondent was so child namely, respectively; on account of matrimonial discord between the parties, the above mentioned divorce petition came to be preferred at t 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Transfer Application No. Date of Decision: 0 Vs HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH Mr. Sunil Bhardwaj, Advocate for the applicant/ petitioner. Mr. Rahul Makkar, Advocate for the respondent. **** HARKESH MANUJA, J. (Oral) The applicant-wife, by way of present case, seeks transfer of divorce petition bearing no. HMA-669/2025 filed under Section 13 (1) (ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 ( to be referred as “divorce petition”) at the instance of respondent husband; from the Court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Camp at Bahadurgarh to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Rohtak Briefly stating, the marriage between the respondent was solemnized on 31.03.2016 namely, Anvi and Tanvi, were born on ; on account of matrimonial discord between the parties, the above mentioned divorce petition came to be preferred at t IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Transfer Application No. 137 of 2026 (O&M) 08.07.2026 ......Petitioner …..Respondent HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH MANUJA wife, by way of present case, seeks transfer of /2025, titled “Ankur Vs. Sangeeta of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter ) at the instance of respondent husband; from the Court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Jhajjar competent jurisdiction at Rohtak. Briefly stating, the marriage between the petitioner and 31.03.2016; out of their wedlock, two girl born on 11.03.2017 and 30.03.2020, ; on account of matrimonial discord between the parties, the above mentioned divorce petition came to be preferred at the instance of 1 wife, by way of present case, seeks transfer of Ankur Vs. Sangeeta”, hereinafter ) at the instance of respondent- Jhajjar and two girl 11.03.2017 and 30.03.2020, ; on account of matrimonial discord between the parties, the he instance of SANJAY GUPTA 2026.07.17 16:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document TA No.137 of 2026 respondent-husband. thereof came to be filed by the applicant [3] Learned counsel for the applicant, applicant-wife is residing alongwith her home. Accordingly, a prayer is made for transfer of the above mentioned divorce petition filed at the instance of respondent learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Court of competent jurisdiction at Rohtak [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 MNT No.125/408/2025 from the respondent Family Court, Karnal, in which and petition bearing No. GW/17/2028 under Guardians and Wards Act, 1890; whereby written statement is to be submitted [7] As per the averments made in the present transfer application, the applicant-wife is residing with her source of income. [8] Furthermore, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Manjula Singh Chouhan “2019 (13) SCC 660” connected matrimonial proceedings should ordinarily be heard by the same 2026 husband. Thereupon, the present application seeking transfer came to be filed by the applicant-wife. Learned counsel for the applicant, wife is residing alongwith her two Accordingly, a prayer is made for transfer of the above mentioned divorce petition filed at the instance of respondent learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Jhajjar Camp at Bahadurgarh competent jurisdiction at Rohtak. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent vehemently opposes the prayer made on behalf of the applicant. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through book. In the present case, admittedly, the applicant 125/408/2025 under Section 144 BNSS, seeking maintenance from the respondent-husband before the Court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Karnal, in which case is at the stage of pe and petition bearing No. GW/17/2028 under Guardians and Wards Act, 1890; whereby written statement is to be submitted As per the averments made in the present transfer application, wife is residing with her parents source of income. Furthermore, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Manjula Singh Chouhan Versus Vishal Singh Chouhan 2019 (13) SCC 660” held that in the interest of both the parties, all connected matrimonial proceedings should ordinarily be heard by the same , the present application seeking transfer wife. Learned counsel for the applicant, inter alia, contends that the two minor daughters at her parental Accordingly, a prayer is made for transfer of the above mentioned divorce petition filed at the instance of respondent-husband from Court of Jhajjar Camp at Bahadurgarh to the On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent vehemently opposes the prayer made on behalf of the applicant. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through In the present case, admittedly, the applicant-wife has filed under Section 144 BNSS, seeking maintenance husband before the Court of learned Principal Judge, case is at the stage of petitioner evidence and petition bearing No. GW/17/2028 under Guardians and Wards Act, 1890; whereby written statement is to be submitted. As per the averments made in the present transfer application, parents and has no independent Furthermore, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Vishal Singh Chouhan, reported as held that in the interest of both the parties, all connected matrimonial proceedings should ordinarily be heard by the same 2 , the present application seeking transfer , contends that the at her parental Accordingly, a prayer is made for transfer of the above mentioned Court of to the On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through wife has filed under Section 144 BNSS, seeking maintenance husband before the Court of learned Principal Judge, titioner evidence and petition bearing No. GW/17/2028 under Guardians and Wards Act, As per the averments made in the present transfer application, has no independent the case of reported as held that in the interest of both the parties, all connected matrimonial proceedings should ordinarily be heard by the same SANJAY GUPTA 2026.07.17 16:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document TA No.137 of 2026 Court and accordingly, allowed the transfer application therein. paragraphs No.3 to 5 thereof are extracted hereunder: “3. 4. 5. [9] Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, in the humble opinion of under Section 144 BNSS as well as petition under Guardian and Wards Act is pending adjudication at Rohtak, therefore, both the parties that all their cases be heard to [10] Consequently divorce petition under Section 13 HMA/669/2025 husband, stands transferred from the Court, Jhajjar Camp at Bahadurgarh at Rohtak. The requisite record of the aforesaid case be sent by the of learned Principal Judge, Family the Court concerned 2026 Court and accordingly, allowed the transfer application therein. paragraphs No.3 to 5 thereof are extracted hereunder: 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 not be permitted. The fact remains that the respondent has to travel to Bhopal for conduct of other cases pending in Family Court, Bhopal. 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. Therefore, H.M.A. Case No.71/2016 is transferred from Family Court, Indore to the Family Court, Bhopal Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, in the humble opinion of this Court, since two petitions i.e. maintenance petition under Section 144 BNSS as well as petition under Guardian and Wards Act is pending adjudication at Rohtak, therefore, both the parties that all their cases be heard to Consequently, the transfer application is divorce petition under Section 13 (1) (ia) 2025, titled “Ankur Vs. Sangeeta husband, stands transferred from the learned Principal Judge, Family Jhajjar Camp at Bahadurgarh to the Court of . The requisite record of the aforesaid case be sent by the rincipal Judge, Family Court, Jhajjar Camp at Bahadurgarh to Court concerned at Rohtak. Court and accordingly, allowed the transfer application therein. Relevant paragraphs No.3 to 5 thereof are extracted hereunder:- 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 he appellant only, therefore, transfer may not be permitted. The fact remains that the respondent has to travel to Bhopal for conduct of other cases pending in 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 Therefore, H.M.A. Case No.71/2016 is transferred from Family Court, Indore to the Family Court, Bhopal.” Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, in the since two petitions i.e. maintenance petition under Section 144 BNSS as well as petition under Guardian and Wards Act is pending adjudication at Rohtak, therefore, it would be in the interest of both the parties that all their cases be heard together by the same Court. the transfer application is allowed and the of the Hindu Marriage Act i.e. “Ankur Vs. Sangeeta”, filed by the respondent learned Principal Judge, Family to the Court of competent jurisdiction . The requisite record of the aforesaid case be sent by the Court ourt, Jhajjar Camp at Bahadurgarh to 3 Relevant 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 he appellant only, therefore, transfer may not be permitted. The fact remains that the respondent has to travel to Bhopal for conduct of other cases pending in 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 Therefore, H.M.A. Case No.71/2016 is transferred from Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, in the since two petitions i.e. maintenance petition under Section 144 BNSS as well as petition under Guardian and Wards Act it would be in the interest of gether by the same Court. and the of the Hindu Marriage Act i.e. , filed by the respondent- learned Principal Judge, Family competent jurisdiction Court ourt, Jhajjar Camp at Bahadurgarh to SANJAY GUPTA 2026.07.17 16:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document TA No.137 of 2026 [10]. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. 08.07.2026 sanjay Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable 2026 Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand (HARKESH MANUJA) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No 4 Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand SANJAY GUPTA 2026.07.17 16:42 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document