NEERAJ NARANG v. HARKESH MANUJA

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKESH HARKESH MANUJA Present: Mr. A.S. Khosa, Advocate for the Mr. A.S. Khosa, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Anita Kumari, Advocate for the respondent. Ms. Anita Kumari, Advocate for the respondent. Ms. Anita Kumari, Advocate for the respondent. **** HARKESH MANUJA, J. (ORAL) HARKESH MANUJA [1] wife, by way of present application, seeks transfer of case The petitioner-wife, by way of present application, seeks transfer of case wife, by way of present application, seeks transfer of case The petitioner bearing DMC No. No. 696 of 2025, dated 27.11.2025 Vs. 27.11.2025, titled “Neeraj Narang Vs. Kaushlya Rani”, filed under Section 13(i)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 ”, filed under Section 13(i)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 - (hereinafter to be referred as “divorce petition”) at the instance of respondent (hereinafter to be referred as “divorce petition”) at the instance of respondent- (hereinafter to be referred as “divorce petition”) at the instance of respondent husband; from the Court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court, husband; from the Court of learned Principal to the Judge, Family Court, Hisar to the Court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Fazilka Court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Fazilka. Briefly stating, the marriage between the petitioner and respondent was [2] Briefly stating, the marriage between the petitioner and respondent was Briefly stating, the marriage between the petitioner and respondent was Briefly stating, the marriage between the petitioner and respondent was solemnized on 21.08.2020

21.08.2020; out of their wedlock, a , ; out of their wedlock, a girl child namely, Vanshika, was born on 09.06.2021 ; on account of matrimonial discord between the 09.06.2021; on account of matrimonial discord between the ; on account of matrimonial discord between the parties, the above mentioned divorce petition came to be preferred at the parties, the above mentioned divorce petition came to be preferred at the parties, the above mentioned divorce petition came to be preferred at the parties, the above mentioned divorce petition came to be preferred at the husband. Thereafter, the present application seeking instance of respondent-husband. Thereafter, the present application seeking husband. Thereafter, the present application seeking instance of respondent wife. its transfer came to be filed by the petitioner-wife. its transfer came to be filed by t - [3] Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that the petitioner Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that the petitioner- Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, contends that the petitioner wife has also filed maintenance application under Section 144 of BNSS wife has also filed maintenance application before under Section 144 of BNSS before the Court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Fazilka. the Court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court, the Court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court, TA-370-2026 -2- It is further submitted that the petitioner is residing at her parental home at Fazilka with a minor male child of 11 years who was born from the first marriage. Accordingly, a prayer is made for transfer of the above mentioned divorce petition filed at the instance of respondent-husband from Family Court, Hisar to Family Court, Fazilka. [4] On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent vehemently opposes the prayer made on behalf of the petitioner. [5] I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the paper-book. [6] In the present case, admittedly, the petitioner-wife has filed a maintenance application under Section 144 of BNSS which is pending adjudication before the Court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Fazilka. [7] As per the averments made in the present transfer application, the distance between Hisar and Fazilka is 238 kilometres and the petitioner along with a male child of 11 years has to travel from Hisar to Fazilka which is situated at a distance of 238 kilometres, thus, causing great inconvenience to the petitioner-wife and her child. Moreover, petitioner-wife does not have any source of income and is totally dependent on her old parents. [8] Furthermore, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in its decision rendered in “Manjula Singh Chouhan Versus Vishal Singh Chouhan”, reported as 2019 (13) SCC 660 held that, in the interest of both the parties, all connected matrimonial proceedings should ordinarily be heard by the same Court and, accordingly, allowed the transfer application therein. [9] Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, in the humble opinion of this Court, it would be in the interest of both the parties that all their cases be heard together by the same Court. Consequently the transfer application is allowed and the divorce petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act i.e. DMC/696/2025, titled “Neeraj Narang Vs. Kaushlya Rani”, TA-370-2026 -3- filed by the respondent-husband, stands transferred from the Family Court, Hisar to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Family Court, Fazilka. The requisite record of the aforesaid case be sent by the Family Court, Hisar to the Court concerned. [10] Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.

02.07.2026 Tejwinder (HARKESH MANUJA) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Whether reportable Yes/No Yes/No