SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Akanksha @ Akanksha Taneja vs Vipin Kumar Chaudhary on 17 July, 2019

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

?Court No. – 9

Case :- TRANSFER APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. – 326 of 2018

Applicant :- Akanksha @ Akanksha Taneja

Opposite Party :- Vipin Kumar Chaudhary

Counsel for Applicant :- Kshitij Shailendra

Counsel for Opposite Party :- Anwar Hussain

connect with

Case :- TRANSFER APPLICATION (CIVIL) No. – 330 of 2018

Applicant :- Akanksha @ Akanksha Taneja

Opposite Party :- Vipin Kumar Chaudhary

Counsel for Applicant :- Kshitij Shailendra

Counsel for Opposite Party :- Anwar Hussain

Hon’ble Anjani Kumar Mishra,J.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

Both these transfer applications are between the same parties and have been heard together and are being decided by a common order.

Transfer Application No.326 of 2018 is by the wife and seeks transfer of a divorce petition filed by the husband at Aligarh.

Transfer Application no.330 of 2018 again by the wife and seeks transfer of a petition under the Guardian and SectionWards Act again instituted by the husband, at Aligarh.

Transfer of both these cases are being sought to District Moradabad on the ground of convenience as also pendency of other cases between the parties at Moradabad including a case under Section 125 Cr.P.C. for maintenance.

Additionally, it has been submitted by counsel for the applicant that one of the grounds, on which, the divorce petition has been filed is that the applicant-wife is physically and mentally, handicapped. This, it is contended is an additional ground why the transfer application should be allowed.

The transfer applications have been opposed by the husband-opposite party on the ground that the maternal grand father of the applicant wife is a practising lawyer at Aligarh. Both the cases filed by her are through her grand-father junior and this fact have not been denied by the applicant in her pleadings.

It is also contended that the opposite party apprehends since untoward incident, in case, the transfer applications are allowed and the matters are transferred to Moradabad.

On a pointed query by the Court, as to the basis of the apprehension and also as to whether on the basis of such apprehension, any transfer application has been filed by him seeking transfer of the cases pending at Moradabad out side the District, Counsel for the opposite party has only submitted that since, the maternal grand father of the applicant is a practising lawyer at Moradabad, the transfer application should not be allowed.

I have considered the submissions made by counsel for the parties and perused the record.

The factum that the wife is residing at Moradabad is not in dispute. Neither, the pendency of the case under Section 125 Cr.P.C., which has been instituted by the wife against the husband at Moradabad.

In my considered opinion, all the cases between the parties are liable to be heard and decided at one place, which will definitely be convenient for all concerned. On this ground alone, this transfer application is liable to be allowed.

The ground taken by the opposite party for opposing the transfer application, in my considered opinion is not genuine. In case, there existed a genuine apprehension of personal safety, the opposite party could necessarily have filed transfer applications seeking transfer of the cases pending at Moradabad to some other district.This has admittedly not being done.

Accordingly and for the reasons given above, these transfer applications are hereby allowed.

Marriage Petition No.1413 of 2017 (Vipin Kumar Chaudhary Vs. Akanksha @ Akanksha Taneja) and Case No.25 of 2017 (Vipin Kumar Chaudhary Vs. Smt. Akanksha Taneja), under Sections 7, Section9 and Section10 of the Guardians and SectionWards Act,, pending before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Aligarh shall stand transferred to District Moradabad, forthwith.

Order Date :- 17.7.2019

RKM

 

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Not found ...? HOW TO WIN 498a, DV, DIVORCE; Search in Above link

All Law documents and Judgment copies
Laws and Bare Acts of India
Landmark SC/HC Judgements
Rules and Regulations of India.

STUDY REPORTS

Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation