SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Santosh vs Parveen on 29 November, 2019


T.A. No. 545 of 2019
DATE OF DECISION :- November 29, 2019

Santosh …Applicant


Parveen …Respondent


Present:- Mr. Sumit Sangwan, Advocate for the applicant.

Mr. Wazir Singh, Advocate for the respondent.


Applicant Santosh, aged about 26 years, estranged wife of

Parveen-respondent, presently residing with her widowed mother at

Bhiwani on account of matrimonial discord between the spouses, by way of

filing the instant application seeks transfer of petition under Section 9 of the

Hindu Marriage Act filed by her husband Parveen against her having title

‘Parveen Vs. Santosh’ pending in the Court of Principal Judge, Family

Court, Panipat to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Bhiwani.

According to the applicant, the marriage performed between the

parties on 17.5.2010 ran into rough weather though the couple was not

blessed with any child. On account of maltreatment and harassment by

respondent and his family members, she had to leave the matrimonial home

and start residing with her widowed mother. The applicant has filed petition

under Section 125 Cr.P.C. against the respondent for maintenance. She has

1 of 3
08-12-2019 10:43:57 :::
also filed a petition under Section 12 of Domestic Violence Act. She has

lodged an F.I.R. No. 142 dated 17.2.2019 under Sections 323, Section498A, Section506

IPC in Police Station City Bhiwani. She does not have any source of

income. It is difficult for her to travel from Bhiwani to Panipat covering a

distance of 130 kms on one side so as to attend the dates of hearing in the

Court there, therefore, the application be accepted.

Notice of the application was given to the respondent, who has

put in appearance through counsel vehemently opposing the application.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties besides going

through the record.

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 two cases against her husband in the Court at

the place of her residence wherein the respondent had already put in


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

2 of 3
08-12-2019 10:43:57 :::
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 Principal

Judge, Family Court, Panipat and transferred to Family Court at Bhiwani for

disposal in accordance with law.

The parties through their counsel are directed to appear in the

transferee Court on 20.12.2019. Copies of orders be sent to the Court of

Principal Judge, Family Court, Panipat as well as to the Family Court at

Bhiwani for information and necessary compliance.

November 29, 2019

Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No

Whether Reportable Yes/No

3 of 3
08-12-2019 10:43:57 :::

Leave a Reply

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

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