Punjab-Haryana High Court
Pooja Chopra vs Amit Chopra on 2 July, 2009
Author: M.M.S. Bedi
Bench: M.M.S. Bedi
T.A. No. 295 of 2008 [1]
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH.
T.A. No. 295 of 2008
Date of Decision: July 2, 2009
Pooja Chopra
.....Petitioner
Vs.
Amit Chopra
.....Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.S. BEDI.
-.-
Present:- Mr. M.S. Bedi, Advocate
for the petitioner.
Mr. Sanjay Tangri, Advocate for the respondent.
-.-
M.M.S. BEDI, J. (ORAL)
Petitioner Pooja Chopra wife of respondent Amit Chopra has filed an application under Section 24 of the Civil Procedure Code, for transfer of the divorce petition titled Amit Chopra Vs. Pooja Chopra, pending in the Court of Additional District Judge, Jalandhar to any Court at Ludhiana on the ground that it is inconvenient for her to go to Jalandhar on T.A. No. 295 of 2008 [2] each date of hearing as she has got no source of income whereas respondent has got sufficient earnings from his business at Jalandhar.
Counsel for the respondent/ husband has contended that in the divorce proceedings two witnesses of the respondent-husband in his petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, have already been cross- examined by counsel for the petitioner and that three witnesses i.e. the respondent, his mother and one relative have already been examined in- chief at Jalandhar. The next date of hearing of cross-examination of said witnesses is July 20, 2009. The respondent does not want to examine any other witness except for the said three witnesses. Counsel contends that transfer of the divorce petition, at this stage, will not in any manner benefit the petitioner. It has been informed that a sum of Rs.5,000/- per month as maintenance is being paid to the petitioner. It has also been submitted that this petition has been filed merely to harass the respondent and to pressurise him to withdraw the petition for divorce.
On the other hand, counsel for the petitioner has contended that petitioner has to lead her evidence and it will be inconvenient for her to take her witnesses to Jalandhar. Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that on account of pendency of two other petitions at Ludhiana i.e. a petition under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and another petition under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, for restitution of conjugal rights, all the proceedings should be decided by the Courts of competent jurisdiction at Ludhiana.
T.A. No. 295 of 2008 [3]
I have heard counsel for both the parties. The petitioner seeks the transfer of the divorce petition from Jalandhar to Ludhiana for the purpose of convenience whereas the respondent has opposed the same on the ground that the petition suffers from the vice of mala fide and that on account of the stage of the trial, it will not be of much use to transfer the petition to Ludhiana. The Courts are required to strike a balance between the convenience of both the parties while considering the application under Section 24 of the Civil Procedure Code. No party should be permitted to unnecessarily harass the other party in the garb of a petition under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure. In the present case, out of five witnesses to be examined by the respondent, two have already been examined and cross-examined. Other three witnesses have also been examined-in-chief. Their cross-examination is fixed for July 20, 2009. The expeditious disposal of the proceedings should not be permitted to be affected in the garb of provisions of petition under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure. This petition deserves to be allowed and the divorce petition filed by the respondent deserves to be transferred from Jalandhar to Ludhiana for the reason that the petitioner-wife has filed a petition under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, for restitution of conjugal rights which is pending at Ludhiana. For the fair decision of the matrimonial controversy between the parties, the petitions under Section 13 and Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, are required to be adjudicated by one Court. The petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, pending in District Court, Jalandhar cannot be adjudicated by a Civil Judge, at Ludhiana but the petition under Section T.A. No. 295 of 2008 [4] 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, pending in the Court of Civil Judge, Ludhiana, can always be transferred to the Court of District Judge at Ludhiana as the matrimonial rights of the parties are to be finally determined on the basis of the evidence produced by both the parties. At the same time, the fact cannot be ignored that it will be inconvenient for the three witnesses who have already been examined-in-chief at Jalandhar to go to Ludhiana for cross- examination on July 20, 2009. Besides this, the cross-examination will also be delayed in case the petition of the respondent for divorce is transferred to Ludhiana, at this stage.
In view of the above circumstances, it is ordered that the three witnesses of respondent who have already been examined-in-chief will be cross-examined by the counsel for the petitioner at Jalandhar on July 20, 2009, as the petitioner has already engaged a counsel at Jalandhar. The said counsel has already cross-examined two witnesses. After completion of cross-examination of three witnesses i.e. Amit, his mother and another witness Kamal, the petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, titled Amit Chopra Vs. Pooja, will be transferred to Ludhiana. In case, the cross-examination is not possible for any reasonable ground on July 20, 2009, the trial Court will make earnest endeavour to adjourn the matter for said purpose not beyond 7 days. After cross-examination of the above said three witnesses, the proceedings will be transferred to Ludhiana to be taken up in accordance with procedure of law. After the cross-examination of aforesaid three witnesses, the case file will be sent to District Judge, Ludhiana through the District Judge, Jalandhar. Parties are directed to T.A. No. 295 of 2008 [5] appear in the Court of District Judge, Ludhiana on August 22, 2009. It will be open to the District Judge, Ludhiana, to take up the further proceedings either by himself or entrust the same to any other Court of competent jurisdiction. It will be open to the petitioner to move an application before the District Judge, Ludhiana, to get her petition under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act transferred to the Court of District Judge/Additional District Judge, as the case may be.
Disposed of.
July 2, 2009 (M.M.S.BEDI) sanjay JUDGE