GAGANDEEP KAUR Vs. SUKHJINDRA SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS transfer application under Section 24 CPC has been filed for transferring the divorce petition (No. 20/2013) filed by the non -applicant -husband, Sukhjindra Singh (hereinafter 'the non -applicant'), under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter the Act of 1955) seeking divorce from the applicant (hereinafter 'the applicant'), Smt. Gagandeep Kaur, his wife, from the family Court Jhalawar to the Family court, Sriganganagar. The facts of the case are that the applicant and the non -applicant were married at Sriganganagar and have a two years girl child from their marriage. The non -applicant Sukhjindra Singh is presently working as a lecturer posted at Government Engineering College, Jhalawar. The applicant is presently residing with her parents at Sriganganagar. The non -applicant filed a divorce petition under Section 13 of the Act of 1955 against the applicant before the Family Court, Jhalawar. The applicant has been served and has put her appearance through an advocate before the Family Court at Jhalawar opposing the divorce petition.

(2.) IT appears that owing to the matrimonial discord aside of the petition under Section 13 of the Act of 1955 filed by the non -applicant, the applicant on her part has also taken proceedings under Indian Penal Code as also under the Code of Criminal Procedure against the non -applicant. FIR No. 117/2013 for offences under Sections 498A and 406 IPC has been filed at Mahila Thana, Sriganganagar by the applicant against the non -applicant. Further FIR No. 523/2013 at Police Station, Sriganganagar has been filed for offences under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 & 120B IPC against the non -applicant by the applicant alleging that a purported compromise deed cum settlement dated 17.05.2012 and alleged receipt dated 05.09.2012 in allege pursuance thereof for a sum of Rs. 9 lakhs stated to have been received by the applicant as consideration for agreeing to discontinue her marriage with the non -applicant is forged and fabricated. Proceedings under Sections 106, 107 and 116 Cr.P.C. were also taken by the applicant against the non -applicant at Mahila Thana, Sriganganagar for a direction that the non -applicant maintain peace and good behavior. Counsel submits that it is thus apparent that aside of the divorce petition pending before the Family Court, Jhalawar, criminal cases are pending against the non -applicant at Sriganganagar. It is submitted that District Jhalawar is at the distance of about 1,000/ - kilometer from District Sriganganagar and it would be extremely inconvenient and cause great hardship in the event the applicant were required to travel to Jhalawar to contest divorce petition filed by the non -applicant. Relying on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Rajni Kumar Vs. Raghvinder Sahay @ Lal Babu ( : 2009 (1) WLC (SC) Civil 530) and Samita Bhattacharjee Vs. Kulashekhar Bhattacharjee ( : 2008 (1) WLC (SC) 637), it has been submitted that it is the consistent practice of the courts that convenience of the wife is to be taken into consideration for transferring of matrimonial dispute to the places of their residence unless special/extraordinary circumstances militate against such a transfer.

(3.) I have heard the counsel for the applicant as also the non -applicant.