SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Sunaina vs Surinder Kumar on 15 January, 2019

TA No. 379 of 2018 -1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

TA No. 379 of 2018 (OM)
Date of decision : 15.1.2019

Sunaina
…………….Applicant

vs.

Surender Kumar
……………..Respondent

Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice H. S. Madaan

Present: Ms. Monika Sharma, Advocate for the applicant.

Mr. Ravi Sodhi, Advocate and
Mr. M.M. Panday, Advocate for the respondent.

H. S. Madaan, J. (Oral)

CM 412-CII-2019

This is an application for restoration of transfer application

dismissed in default on 17.12.2018.

Heard.

In the interest of justice, the application is accepted and

transfer application is ordered to be restored and registered at its

original number.

The main case is taken up today.

Main case

Heard.

1 of 3
20-01-2019 10:19:12 :::
TA No. 379 of 2018 -2-

By way of moving the present application under Section 24

read with Section 151 CPC, applicant Sunaina, aged about 27 years,

estranged wife of Surender Kumar – respondent, presently residing

with her parents at Fazilka, seeks transfer of petition under Sections

7, 17 and 25 of Guardians and Wards Act, 1890, for custody of minor

son of the parties, namely, Lovepreet, presently residing with the

applicant, pending in the Court of District Judge, Sirsa, having title

‘Surender Kumar vs. Sunaina’, to a Court of competent jurisdiction at

Fazilka.

Notice of the application was given to the respondent, who

has appeared through counsel and is opposing the application

vehemently.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties, besides going

through the record.

Section 9 of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 provides

that the application with respect to the guardianship of the person of

the minor, is to be made to the District Court having jurisdiction in

the place where the minor ordinarily resides. In this case, as per

version of the applicant, the minor son of the parties, namely,

Lovepreet is residing with her at Fazilka. Therefore, the petition

should have been filed in the Court of competent jurisdiction at

Fazilka.

Accordingly, the present application is disposed of relegating

the applicant to the remedy of approaching the trial Court, moving

appropriate application seeking return of the petition on account of

lack of territorial jurisdiction, for presentation to the Court of

2 of 3
20-01-2019 10:19:12 :::
TA No. 379 of 2018 -3-

competent jurisdiction at Fazilka. However, if after disposal of the

application, the applicant is still dissatisfied then she would be at

liberty to approach this Court again.

( H.S. Madaan )
15.1.2019 Judge
chugh

Whether speaking / reasoned Yes / No

Whether reportable Yes / No

3 of 3
20-01-2019 10:19:12 :::

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