Punjab-Haryana High Court
Paramjit Kaur Walia vs Charanjit Singh Walia on 13 September, 2022
Author: Arvind Singh Sangwan
Bench: Arvind Singh Sangwan
TA-618-2020 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
TA-618-2020 (O&M)
Date of decision: 13.09.2022
Paramjit Kaur Walia
....Petitioner
Vs.
Charanjit Singh Walia
....Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN
Present: Mr. Balraj Gujjar, Advocate
for the petitioner.
None for the respondent.
*******
ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN, J. (Oral)
Prayer in this petition is for transfer of Civil Suit No.626 of 2020 titled as Charanjit Singh Vs. Paramjit Kaur and another, pending before the Additional Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.), Fatehgarh Sahib to the competent Court of jurisdiction at Chandigarh.
While issuing notice of motion, following order was passed by this Court on 22.12.2020: -
"Inter alia submits that the respondent solemnized a second marriage in the year 1999 but the petitioner acquired knowledge of the same only sometimes in the year 2013.
Thereafter, by virtue of a civil court decree, he transferred 1 of 5 ::: Downloaded on - 15-09-2022 15:07:35 ::: TA-618-2020 -2- twelve and a half kanals of land to the petitioner and also promised to pay `2,000/- per month. However, he has not paid the maintenance till date and has filed a suit for injunction at Fatehgarh Sahib to restrain the petitioner from executing the decree of the year 2013. The petitioner has already filed a police complaint followed by a criminal complaint at Chandigarh. She is residing with her married daughter at Chandigarh and thus, the injunction suit filed at Fatehgarh Sahib deserves to be transferred to Chandigarh."
Learned counsel has relied upon the judgments Sumita Singh Vs. Kumar Sanjay, 2002 SC 396 and Rajani Kishor Pardeshi Vs. Kishor Babulal Pardeshi, 2005(12) SCC 237, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed that while deciding the transfer application, the Courts are required to give more weightage and consideration to the convenience of the female litigants and transfer of legal proceedings from one Court to another should ordinarily be allowed, taking into consideration their convenience and the Courts should desist from putting female litigants under undue hardships."
Learned counsel has further relied upon N.C.V. Aishwarya Vs. A.S. Saravana Karthik Sha, 2022 Live Law (SC) 627, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court held as under: -
"The cardinal principle for exercise of power under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure is that the ends of justice should
2 of 5 ::: Downloaded on - 15-09-2022 15:07:36 ::: TA-618-2020 -3- demand the transfer of the suit, appeal or other proceeding. In matrimonial matters, wherever Courts are called upon to consider the plea of transfer, the Courts have to take into consideration the economic soundness of both the parties, the social strata of the spouses and their behavioural pattern, their standard of life prior to the marriage and subsequent thereto and the circumstances of both the parties in eking out their livelihood and under whose protective umbrella they are seeking their sustenance to life. Given the prevailing socioeconomic paradigm in the Indian society, generally, it is the wife's convenience which must be looked at while considering transfer.
Further, when two or more proceedings are pending in different Courts between the same parties which raise common question of fact and law, and when the decisions in the cases are interdependent, it is desirable that they should be tried together by the same Judge so as to avoid multiplicity in trial of the same issues and conflict of decisions." As per office report, the respondent is served, however, there is no representation on his behalf and even no reply has been filed.
It is well settled that while considering the transfer of a matrimonial dispute/case at the instance of the wife, the Court is to consider family condition of the wife, custody of the minor child, economic condition 3 of 5 ::: Downloaded on - 15-09-2022 15:07:36 ::: TA-618-2020 -4- of the wife, her physical health and earning capacity of the husband and most important, convenience of the wife i.e. she cannot travel alone without assistance of a male member of her family, connectivity of the place to and fro from her place of residence as well as bearing of the litigation charges and travelling expenses.
After hearing the counsel for the petitioner, considering the fact that the petitioner-wife will have to bear the litigation expenses and transportation expenses and in view of the judgments in Sumita Singh's case (supra), Rajani Kishor Pardeshi's case (supra) and N.C.V. Aishwarya's case (supra) passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, this Court deem it appropriate to allow the present petition, subject to the following conditions:-
1. The Civil Suit No.626 of 2020 titled as Charanjit Singh Vs. Paramjit Kaur and another, pending before the Addl. Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.), Fatehgarh Sahib will be transferred to the competent Court of jurisdiction at Chandigarh.
2. The District Judge, Chandigarh will assign the said petition to the competent Court of jurisdiction.
3. The Addl. Civil Judge (Sr. Divn.), Fatehgarh Sahib is directed to transfer all the record pertaining to the aforesaid case to District Judge, Chandigarh.
4. The parties are directed to appear before the trial Court, Chandigarh within a period of 01 month from today.
5. The trial Court, Chandigarh will make all the endeavour to refer the case before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre for exploring the possibility of amicable settlement between the parties.
4 of 5 ::: Downloaded on - 15-09-2022 15:07:36 ::: TA-618-2020 -5-
6. The Court concerned, where the litigations between the parties are pending, will accommodate them with one date in one calender month.
Present petition is disposed of accordingly.
[ ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN ]
JUDGE
13.09.2022
vishnu
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable: Yes/No
5 of 5
::: Downloaded on - 15-09-2022 15:07:36 :::