VANDANA GARG Vs. SANJAY KUMAR GARG

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is petition under Section 24 of Civil Procedure (for short "the Code") for transfer of a petition under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short "the Act") filed by the respondent- husband titled as "Sanjay Kumar v. Vandana" pending in the Court of Mrs. Neena Chaudhary, Additional District Judge, Karnal to the Court District Judge, Panchkula.

(2.) AS per the averments made in the petition, the petitioner is a household lady and has one small child and both of them have been living at Panchkula at the house of the petitioner's parents. She has no independent source of income and she and her lone son are at the mercy of petitioner's parents. It is difficult for her to contest or defend the proceedings pending at a distant place i.e. at Karnal. There is no other male member in the family except her father and one brother. Her father is a Government employee and thus cannot accompany her on all dates of hearing to Karnal and petitioner's brother is pursuing his studies. The petitioner's son being of a small age can neither be taken to the Court at Karnal nor can he can left behind alone with her parents.

(3.) AFTER hearing counsel for the parties and perusing the record, I am of the view that the prayer of the petitioner deserves to be granted. In Smt. Daisy's case (supra), the matrimonial proceedings pending in the Court at Rohtak were ordered to be transferred to Jind having regard to the fact that the distance between the place where the wife was residing and Rohtak where the petition was pending, was nearly 100 Kms. and also the fact that she was to go all alone to attend the proceedings at Rohtak. In other words, the convenice of the wife was considered to be the primary factor for ordering transfer.