AMARJIT KAUR Vs. MOHINDER SINGH TEJI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Applicant Amarjit Kaur, aged about 41 years, estranged wife of respondent No.1 Mohinder Singh Teji, presently residing with her parents at Village Sansarpur, Tehsil and District Jalandhar, on account of matrimonial discord between the spouses, by way of filing the present application, seeks transfer of divorce petition, filed by her husband, respondent No.1 against her having title 'Mohinder Singh Vs. Amarjit Kaur and another' pending in the Court of District Judge, Ludhiana to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Jalandhar.

(2.) According to the applicant, the marriage solemnized between the parties in the month of October 1995 did not work, though, the couple was blessed with three children i.e. daughters Gurpreet Kaur and Rubila and a son, namely Gurwinder Singh. On account of harassment and maltreatment meted out to the applicant at the hands of respondent in connection with demand of more dowry, the applicant was forced to leave the matrimonial home and start residing with her parents along with minor children of the parties. The applicant does not have any source of income and is dependent upon her parents for meeting her financial needs and those of minor children of the parties; that respondent No.1 had filed a petition for divorce at Ludhiana and obtained ex parte decree on 02.04.1997. However, an application was filed by present applicant/wife for setting aside of that ex parte judgment and decree, which was dismissed by the trial Court, vide order dated 14.08.1997. That order was, however, challenged in the High Court and ex parte judgment and decree were set aside. Respondent No.1 had filed an appeal before the Apex Court, which was dismissed, vide judgment dated 12.01.2016. Respondent No.1 has again filed a divorce petition on false grounds, which is not maintainable, since the controversy has already been decided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The applicant has filed a petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. besides a complaint under Sections 498-A, 494 etc. IPC against the respondent in Courts at Jalandhar. Under the circumstances, it is difficult for her to travel from her parental place to Ludhiana, to attend the dates of hearing in the Court there. Therefore, the present application be accepted.

(3.) Notice of the application was given to the respondent who put in appearance through counsel, filed written reply and is opposing the application vehemently, contending that the second divorce petition has been filed on the ground of adultery and respondent is suffering from serious heart ailment, as such, unable to travel from Ludhiana to Jalandhar. He has drawn my attention to the supporting documents in that regard. I have heard learned counsel for the parties besides going through the record.