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 3, Cited by 1]

Punjab-Haryana High Court

Ridhi Goel vs Sanjeev Kumar Goyal on 28 February, 2011

Author: Jitendra Chauhan

Bench: Jitendra Chauhan

TA No.561 of 2010                                                   1

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
                     CHANDIGARH


                                               TA No.561 of 2010

                                              Date of decision : 28.2.2011

Ridhi Goel,
                                                            ...Applicant

                                   Versus

Sanjeev Kumar Goyal

                                                            ...Respondent

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN

Present:      Mr. Surinder Garg, Advocate,
              for the applicant.

              Mr. P.L.Singla, Advocate,
              for the respondent.


JITENDRA CHAUHAN, J. (Oral)

The present application has been filed by the wife seeking transfer of matrimonial proceedings pending at Moga to Barnala, where she is now residing. The grouse of the applicant is that she is not keeping good health and residing at the mercy of her parents. It is not possible for the applicant to attend the court proceedings at Moga.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. From the perusal of file, it emerges that the applicant is a resident of District Barnala. As per Annexure P-3, it is established that the applicant has fragile health. She is living at the mercy of her parents. The distance between Barnala to Moga is about 70 kms and in the fact situation, it is difficult for the applicant to attend the court TA No.561 of 2010 2 proceedings at Moga.

In the circumstances, it would certainly be not convenient for the applicant to undertake frequent trips from Barnala to Moga. The balance of convenience is in favour of the applicant and against the respondent.

6. It is well settled principle of law that convenience of the wife is to be seen in such like matters as has been held in cases of Sumitra Singh vs. Kumar Sanjay and another, AIR 2002 SC 396; Neelam Kanwar Vs. Devinder Singh Kanwar, 2001(1) MLJ 509 (SC) and Mangla Patil Kale Vs. Sanjeev Kumr, (2003) 10 SCC 280.

8. In view of the above, the instant transfer application is allowed and the petition under Section 13 of the Act titled 'Sanjeev Kumar Goel Vs. Ridhi is withdrawn from the Court of learned Additional District Judge, Moga and is transferred to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Barnala File of the petition shall be sent by the trial Court at Moga to the learned Ist Additional District Judge, Barnala, within two weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. The learned Ist Additional District Judge, Barnala will either dispose it of himself or entrust it to any other Court of competent jurisdiction.

9. The parties shall appear before the Court of learned Ist Additional District Judge, Barnala, on 28.03.2011.



28.02.2011                                (JITENDRA CHAUHAN)
atulsethi                                       JUDGE