SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Manju And Anr vs Gulshan Kumar on 24 September, 2018

TA-1074-2017 and TA-130-2018 [1]

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH

TA No.1074 of 2017(OM)

Manju and another .. Petitioners

vs.

Gulshan Kumar .. Respondent

AND

TA No.130 of 2018(OM)

Manju .. Petitioners

vs.

Gulshan Kumar .. Respondent

Date of decision:- 24.09.2018

Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Harinder Singh Sidhu

Present:- Mr. Pawan Kumar, Senior Advocate with
Mr. Rohit Kumar, Advocate
for the petitioners.

Mr. S.S. Sodhi, Advocate
for the respondent.
***

Harinder Singh Sidhu, J.

This order shall dispose of two Transfer Applications bearing

No.1074 of 2017 and 130 of 2018 filed by Manju-wife against Gulshan

Kumar-husband.

In TA No.1074 of 2017, transfer of petition under Hindu

Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956 read with the provisions of Guardians

and Wards Act, bearing No.GW-Filing No.65/2017 titled as ‘Gulshan

Kumar vs. Mahirveer’, is sought.

1 of 4
02-10-2018 13:27:01 :::
TA-1074-2017 and TA-130-2018 [2]

In TA No.130 of 2018, transfer of petition under Section 9 of

the Hindu Marriage Act, bearing case type HMA, No.196/2007 titled

‘Gulshan Kumar vs. Manju’, is sought.

Both the aforesaid petitions, filed by the respondent-husband,

which are pending in the Court of learned Civil Judge (Senior Division),

Chandigarh, are sought to be transferred to a court of competent jurisdiction

at Patiala.

It is the case of the petitioner that the marriage between

petitioner No.1 and the respondent was solemnized on 10.02.2012 at Patiala

according to Sikh rites. A son, petitioner No.2-Mahirveer was born to them.

From the very beginning, the respondent and his family members harassed

and maltreated petitioner No.1 on account of demand of dowry. Ultimately,

the respondent deserted petitioner No.1 on 14.04.2017, leaving her with no

other option but to return to her parental home. Since then, she is residing

with her parents at Patiala alongwith her minor son, who is presently aged

about 4 years.

Petitioner No.1 has filed a criminal complaint bearing

No.COMP/7799/2017 under Sections 420, 324, 506, 406, 498-A read with

Section 34 IPC, which is pending before learned Judicial Magistrate Ist

Class, Patiala. She has also filed a complaint under Sections 12(1), 17, 18,

19, 20 and 22 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act,

2005 against the respondent and his family members, which is pending

before learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patiala. A petition under Section

125 Cr.P.C. for maintenance is pending in the Court of learned JMIC,

Patiala. The parents of petitioner No.1 are old and they are not having good

health. The brother of petitioner No.1 is not residing with her parents.

2 of 4
02-10-2018 13:27:02 :::
TA-1074-2017 and TA-130-2018 [3]

There is no one in the family to accompany her for attending the court

proceedings at Chandigarh which is at a distance of about 70 km. from

Patiala. Further more, her minor son is studying in Ryan International

School, Patiala in Nursery class.

Earlier the matter was referred to the Mediation and

Conciliation Centre of this Court to explore the possibility of settlement.

However, it was not successful.

Learned counsel for the respondent states that the respondent is

still willing to settle the disputes with the petitioner. Respondent is also

present in the Court and affirms as much. However, at this stage, the

petitioner has shown no inclination in that direction.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the

petitions are allowed.

The petitions – one under the Hindu Minority and Guardianship

Act, 1956 read with the provisions of Guardians and Wards Act, 1890

bearing No.GW-Filing No.65/2017 titled as ‘Gulshan Kumar vs. Mahirveer’,

and another under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 bearing case

type HMA, No.196/2007 titled ‘Gulshan Kumar vs. Manju’, filed by the

respondent-husband, which are pending in the Court of learned Civil Judge

(Senior Division), Chandigarh, are withdrawn from the said Court and

transferred to Patiala. The District Judge, Patiala may assign the same to a

Court of competent jurisdiction.

Learned counsel for the respondent states, with the transfer of

the present two cases to Patiala there would be five cases in which the

respondent would be appearing in different Courts at Patiala. The respondent

is a doctor and his professional commitments are demanding. He prayed
3 of 4
02-10-2018 13:27:02 :::
TA-1074-2017 and TA-130-2018 [4]

that as far as possible the cases be listed on same date.

The respondent may make an application before the concerned

trial Courts to accommodate the hearings, as far as possible for the same

date.

September 24, 2018 ( HARINDER SINGH SIDHU )
gian JUDGE

Whether Speaking / Reasoned Yes

Whether Reportable Yes / No

4 of 4
02-10-2018 13:27:02 :::

Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2018 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…

Web Design BangladeshWeb Design BangladeshMymensingh