Punjab-Haryana High Court
Savita vs Abhishek Narula on 5 January, 2022
Author: Alka Sarin
Bench: Alka Sarin
JITENDER KUMAR 2022.01.06 10:51 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 201 TA No.677 of 2019 Date of Decision: 05.01.2022 Savita ....Petitioner VERSUS Abhishek Narula .... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ALKA SARIN Present: None for the petitioner. Respondent in person. 36 OK 2 356 2 3K ALKA SARIN, J. (Oral)
Heard through video conferencing.
The present petition under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 was preferred by the petitioner-wife seeking transfer of the petition filed by the respondent-husband under Section 12 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 being HMA/1088/2017 titled as "Abhishek Narula vs. Savita"' for annulment of marriage by decree of nullity, pending in the Court of Principal District Judge, Family Court, Gurugram to a Court of competent jurisdiction at Panchkula. The petitioner had earlier preferred TA No.1090 of 2018 which was dismissed as withdrawn on 25.03.2019 with liberty to file a fresh one with better particulars. Thereafter, the present petition was filed. On 26.08.2019 notice of motion was issued in the present petition and in the meantime the Trial Court was directed to adjourn the case beyond the date fixed by this Court. Subsequently, from 10.02.2020 onwards, none has put in appearance on behalf of the petitioner. Ordinary as well as dasti notice were I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh TA No.677 of 2019 -2- issued to the petitioner, however, the same have been received back unserved with the report that the petitioner has left the given address 4 years ago. The present petition was initiated by the petitioner by giving her address as resident of House No.496, Sector 11, Panchkula, District Panchkula in the year 2019. However, as per the service report the petitioner is stated to have shifted from the given address four years ago.
None has put in appearance on behalf of the petitioner since 10.02.2020, despite notices having been served upon her as well as upon her counsel.
In view of the above, this Court is left with no other option but to dismiss the present petition for non-prosecution.
Dismissed for non-prosecution.
( ALKA SARIN ) JUDGE 5™ January, 2022 jk NOTE: Whether speaking/non-speaking: Speaking Whether reportable: YES/NO JITENDER KUMAR 2022.01.06 10:51 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh