SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Perry Green Chauhan vs Davis Gill on 10 July, 2019

TA-719 of 2018 and another case -1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH

TA-719-2018 (OM)

Smt. Perry Green Chauhan
…Applicant
Versus

Davis Gill
…Respondent

CRM-M-45263-2018 (OM)

Davis Gill and others
…Petitioners
Versus

Parry
…Respondent

Date of decision: 10.07.2019

CORAM: HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE H.S. MADAAN

Present: Mr. S.D.S. Bali, Advocate for the applicant
in TA-719-2018 and for the respondent
in CRM-M-45263-2018.

Mr. A.K. Kalsy, Advocate
for the petitioners in CRM-M-45263-2018 and
for respondent in TA-719-2018.

****
H.S. MADAAN, J. (Oral)

This order of mine shall dispose of TA-719-2018 filed by

applicant Smt. Perry Green Chauhan, aged about 28 years against her

husband, seeking transfer of petition under Section 22 of the Special

Marriage Act, titled ‘Davis Gill Vs. Smt. Perry Green Chauhan’, pending

in the Court of Addl. District Judge, Ludhiana to the Court of competent

jurisdiction at Ferozepur and CRM-M-45263-2018 filed by Davis Gill,

1 of 5
14-07-2019 17:09:40 :::
TA-719 of 2018 and another case -2-

husband and his family members, seeking transfer of Complaint No.93

dated 24.08.2018, under Section 12 of Protection of Women from

SectionDomestic Violence Act, 2005, titled ‘Parry Vs. Davis Gill and others’,

pending in the Court of CJM, Ferozepur to the Court of competent

jurisdiction at Ludhiana.

According to the applicant, she was married with respondent

on 07.01.2017 at Ferozepur according to Christian rites and ceremonies,

however, the marriage ran into rough weather on account of demand of

dowry by the respondent and his family members from the applicant. The

couple was not blessed with any child. Under the circumstances, the

applicant was forced to leave the matrimonial home and start residing

with her parents at Ferozepur; that the respondent is residing in Canada.

According to the applicant, she does not have any source of income and it

is difficult for the applicant to travel from her parental place to Ludhiana

to attend the dates of hearing in the Court there, covering a distance of

about 130 kms on one side; that she has lodged an FIR against the

respondent for offences under Sections 406 and Section498-A IPC with police of

Ferozepur. She has also filed a petition under provisions of Protection of

Women from SectionDomestic Violence Act, 2005 against the respondent in

Court at Ferozepur. Therefore, the present application be accepted.

Notice of the application was given to the respondent who

put in appearance and filed reply, stating that mother of respondent, who

is his attorney is required to take care of father of respondent, who is her

husband and who is suffering from various ailments, therefore, it would

2 of 5
14-07-2019 17:09:40 :::
TA-719 of 2018 and another case -3-

be difficult for her to go to Ferozepur to appear in the Court in connection

with the dates of hearing, in case, the present application is accepted.

Rather, she had sought transfer of petition under Protection of Women

from SectionDomestic Violence Act, 2005 filed by the applicant against

respondent and others, pending in Court at Ferozepur for that very

reason.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties besides going

through the record.

Admittedly, as per case of the applicant, she does not have

any source of income and is dependent upon her parents for meeting her

needs. She being a young woman, having no source of income, it would

indeed be difficult for her to travel from her parental place to Ludhiana

to attend the dates of hearing in the Court there, covering a distance of

about 130 kms on one side.

The Apex Court in various judgments has observed that in

matrimonial disputes between the spouses convenience of wife should be

looked into. In that regard a reference can be made to authority Sumita

Singh Versus Kumar Sanjay and another, 2002 AIR(SC) 396 by a

Division Bench of Hon’ble Supreme Court.

In Bhartiben Ravibhai Rav Versus Ravibhai Govindbhai

Rav, 2017(3) RCR(Civil) 369, the Apex Court had allowed application

for transfer of the divorce petition to a place where the wife was residing

considering various factors including the distance between the place

where the wife was residing and the place of sitting of the Court where

divorce petition had been instituted and the fact that the wife had filed

3 of 5
14-07-2019 17:09:40 :::
TA-719 of 2018 and another case -4-

two cases against her husband in the Court at the place of her residence

wherein the respondent had already put in appearance.

In Apurva Versus Navtej Singh, 2017(2) Law Herald 966

by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, it was observed that wherever the

Courts are called upon to consider the plea of transfer in matrimonial

disputes, the Courts have to take into consideration various factors like

economic soundness of either of the parties, the social strata of the

spouses to which they belong and behavioural pattern, standard of life

antecedents of marriage. Generally it is the wife’s convenience, which

must be looked at by the Courts while deciding the transfer application.

Keeping in view the contentions in the application and

submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant, in which I find

merit, in absence of any strong circumstance to the contrary, it would be

proper and appropriate, if the application is accepted. The same is

accordingly allowed. The petition in question is ordered to be withdrawn

from the Court of Addl. District Judge, Ludhiana and transferred to the

Court of learned District Judge, Ferozepur for disposal in accordance

with law. Learned District Judge, Ferozepur may retain the petition on

his board or assign it to any other Court of competent jurisdiction.

The parties through counsel are directed to appear in the

transferee Court on 09.08.2019. Copies of orders be sent to both the

Courts for information and necessary compliance.

The respondent himself is residing in Canada. The Court is

not to see convenience of his attorney. If attorney has got any problem in

appearing in Court, he can appoint some other person as attorney and the

4 of 5
14-07-2019 17:09:40 :::
TA-719 of 2018 and another case -5-

choice always remains with him to do so. As regards, the fact that cousin

brother of applicant is a gangster and the respondent and his family

members have a fear of physical harm at his hands, they can certainly

report the matter to the police and get necessary action initiated against

him. Therefore, no ground is there to transfer the case. Accordingly,

petition bearing No. CRM-M-45263-2018 filed by husband and his

family members is dismissed.

10.07.2019 (H.S. MADAAN)
sumit.k JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes No
Whether Reportable : Yes No

5 of 5
14-07-2019 17:09:40 :::

Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2020 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