AND HA ND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH TA-63 631-2025 Sonam Kum Kumari Yadav v. Sonam Kumari Yad ri Yadav’ pending in the Court of Pri

Mr. Himanshu Sharma, Advoca dvocate for the petitioner. Mr. Parmod Chauhan, Advocate vocate for the respondent. NIDHI GUP I GUPTA, J. (ORAL)

Prayer in this petition filed by p d by petitioner-wife is for transfer of the petiti petition filed by respondent-husban usband under Section 13 of the Hindu Marri Marriage Act,1955 (for short ‘the A ‘the Act’) titled ‘Lalit vs. Sonam Kumari Yad ri Yadav’ pending in the Court of Pri of Principal Judge, Family Court, Yamuna Na na Nagar at Jagadhri to a Court o ourt of competent jurisdiction at Rewari.

Learned counsel for the petition etitioner has contended :- i) the parties were were married on 07.12.2022 according to Hindu Rites ites and customs. ii) that no child was born ou orn out of the said wedlock. iii) that due to matrimonia imonial discord the parties are residing separately since since 01.07.2023. iv) that the petitioner has has not source of income to ood. maintain her livelihood. RISHU KATARIA 2026.05.14 19:55 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. TA-631-202 2025 -2- v) that the distance betwee etween place of residence of the petitioner-wife i.e. Re Rewari and the place of proceedings (Annexure exure P-1) filed by the respondent-husband, pen d, pending before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Ya Yamuna Nagar at Jagadhari, is about 250 kilometers on n one side. vii) that there are 02 cases cases filed by the petitioner-wife which are pending adju adjudication before the District Courts at Rewari which a hich are as under:- (a) Petition under Sec MNT/125/1600/20 learned Family Cou er Section 125 Cr.P.C. bearing No. ily Court at Rewari; and pending before (b) Petition under the of Women from Do No. 4283 of 2025 Judicial Magistrate the provisions of the Protection rom Domestic Violence Act bearing f 2025 pending before the learned istrate Ist Class, Rewari.

It is, inter alia, on these grou e grounds that petitioner prays for transfer of th r of the case, as detailed in para 2 abo above.

Per Contra, learned counsel a nsel appearing for the respondent vehemently ently opposes the submissions advanc advanced by learned counsel for the petitioner. A . As regards, the contention of lear of learned counsel for the petitioner that she is u e is un-employed having no source o urce of income, learned counsel for the responde spondent submits that petitioner is a G is a Graduate and able bodied and has no physi physical infirmity. As such she is cap capable of earning livelihood for herself. Mor Moreover, the petitioner is permanen manent resident of Rajasthan and is presently res tly residing at Zirakpur with the rea he real brother-in-law (Jija) of the respondent dent-husband. RISHU KATARIA 2026.05.14 19:55 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. TA-631-202 2025 -3-

on of The aforesaid contention of learned counsel for respondent h dent has been strongly refuted by learn y learned counsel for the petitioner. Learned cou ed counsel for the petitioner submit submits that in the petition under Section 125 n 125 Cr.P.C. bearing No. MNT/125/1 /125/1600/2025 pending before the learned Fam d Family Court at Rewari; and petitio petition under the provisions of the Protection o tion of Women from Domestic Viole Violence Act bearing No. 4283 of 2025 pendin pending before the learned Judicial M icial Magistrate Ist Class, Rewari filed by the by the petitioner, the respondent-hus husband so far has not put in appearance. rance. Moreover, there is threat to th t to the life of the petitioner at the hands of re of respondent-husband. In this reg is regard an FIR No. 25 dated

23.01.2024 2024 under Sections 498-A and 406 406 IPC was registered by the petitioner at ner at Police Station Shahzahanpur, anpur, District Behror against the respondent nt and his family members.

No other argument has been m I een made on behalf of the parties. I have heard l eard learned counsel for the parties rties and carefully gone through the case file. I find merit in the submissions issions advanced on behalf of the dent. respondent.

In view of the facts as enumer numerated above, I am of the view that no exte o extenuating circumstances have b ave been brought to light by the petitioner, on ner, on the basis of which it is shown hown that she is not in a position to travel to Jag to Jagadhri and that too not daily but ily but only on the date of hearing. This Court i ourt is well aware of the preponderan nderance of law in cases of transfer emanating fr ting from matrimonial disputes is in f is in favour of the wife. However, in certain sim ain similar cases as the present one, th one, the Hon’ble Supreme Court, as well as thi s Court have refused relief to the to the wife. One such case which RISHU KATARIA 2026.05.14 19:55 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment. TA-631-202 2025 -4- may be refer e referred to is: (2006) 9 SCC 197 197 ‘Anindita Das Vs. SrijitDas’ wherein Hon in Hon’ble Supreme Court under sim er similar circumstances dismissed the wife’s ife’s application seeking transfer ansfer of petition filed by husband. Ref Reference in this regard may also also be made to two cases of this Court where where, in similar circumstances this s this Court had dismissed transfer applications ations filed on behalf of the wife. The fe. These are: TA no. 126 of 2018 Smt. Akhw Akhwinder Kaur Vs. Sh. Gurpreet et Singh; and TA No. 299 of 2019 Nisha isha alias Manisha vs. Amarveer Y eer Yadav.

Accordingly, in view of the fa the facts and circumstances of the present case case as noted above, as also the prec ove, he precedents of Case law as above, finding no m g no merit in this petition, the same is me is hereby dismissed.

Pending application(s), if any, s any, shall also stand disposed of. 2026

13.05.2026 ( NIDHI GUPTA ) JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No RISHU KATARIA 2026.05.14 19:55 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order/judgment.