Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 5, Cited by 1]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Manpreet Kaur vs Manpreet Kaur From The Court Of Learned ... on 30 July, 2013

Author: Jaswant Singh

Bench: Jaswant Singh

                                                                    Manoj Kumar

TA 252/2013 (O&M)                                              #1#2013.08.13    08:54
                                                                  I attest to the accuracy and
                                                                  integrity of this document
                                                                    High Court Chandigarh


        IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
                    AT CHANDIGARH


                                         TA 252/2013 (O&M)
                                          Date of decision: 30.7.2013

Manpreet Kaur
                                         .............Petitioner

                       v.

Surjit Singh

                                         .............Respondent


CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH



Present:-   Mr. Deepak Arora, Advocate for
            Mr. Harkeerat Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.

            None for the respondent.

Jaswant Singh,J(Oral).

Petitioner wife has filed the present transfer application under Section 24 CPC for the transfer of petition filed by respondent husband under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act,1955 (for short "the Act") for restitution of Conjugal Right, titled Surjit Singh Vs. Manpreet Kaur from the Court of learned Addl. Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Jalandhar to the court of competent jurisdiction at Ludhiana.

It is stated that the marriage between the parties was solemnized on 17.7.2011 at Kapurthala. Out of the said wedlock, no child was born. Due to dowry demand, it is alleged that the petitioner was turned out of the matrimonial home at Jalandhar. It is alleged that the petitioner is residing separately since 14.2.2012 at her parental home at Ludhiana, where a petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C filed by TA 252/2013 (O&M) #2# her is pending.

It is stated that in order to harass the petitioner-wife, the respondent husband filed a petition under Section 9 of the Act which, as noticed above, is pending in the Court of learned Addl. Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Jalandhar.

It is averred that the petitioner is a house wife, has no source of income and she is fully dependent upon her parents while the respondent is not paying even a single penny for the upkeep and maintenance of petitioner wife and in these circumstances, it is difficult for the petitioner to attend the proceedings initiated by the respondent husband at Jalandhar, which is about 60 kms away from Ludhiana.

None has appeared on behalf of the respondent-husband to controvert the aforesaid facts. Thus, I find that the grounds set out in the petition are sufficient to allow the petition as it is well settled that in matrimonial proceedings initiated by the husband against wife, convenience of wife must be looked at. Reliance in this regard can be placed upon Sumita Singh v. Kumar Sanjay and another, AIR 2002 SC 396.

In view of the above, the present petition is allowed, the petition under Section 9 of the Act titled Surjit Singh Vs. Manpreet Kaur from the Court of learned Addl. Civil Judge (Sr. Division), Jalandhar is ordered to be withdrawn and transferred to the District Courts, Ludhiana for disposal in accordance with law from the stage of withdrawal.

July 30, 2013                                     ( JASWANT SINGH )
manoj                                                   JUDGE