Sunita @ Sunita v. Darshan Singh
Case at a glance
Outcome
Allowed
Accordingly application is allowed and it is ordered that the
Provisions considered
Judgment
CORAM :- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH. Present:- None for the Applicant. Ms. Jaspal Kaur, Advocate for the Respondent. *** JASWANT SINGH, J.(ORAL) Applicant-wife Sunita @ Sunita Rani has sought transfer of the petition filed by her husband under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act 1955(for short the Act)from Rajpura to Kurukshetra, interalia, on the ground that she was ready to join the company of the respondent/husband; that there is no male member in her parental family residing at Kurukshetra and that another case under Section 125 Cr.PC between the parties is pending at Kurukshetra. Upon notice respondent-husband had put in appearance., The matter in view of the possibility of compromise was sent to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court. It is apparent from the Transfer Application No.226 of 2010 #2# record that the conciliation proceedings conducted by the mediator have failed and thus the matter has been referred back to this Court.
It is apparent from the pleadings that the applicant-wife and respondent-husband were married 10 years back and they have two children i.e. 09 years old son and 05 years old daughter. The minor children are stated to be residing with the applicant-wife at her parental home at Kurukshetra. It is further apparent from the pleadings and not disputed that since August 2008 proceedings under Section 125 Cr.PC are pending before the Court of competent jurisdiction at Kurukshetra. It is stated that it is difficult for the applicant-wife to travel 100kms away to Rajpura for the conduct of the petition under Section 9 of the Act in view of the fact that she is to take care of her two minor children and there is no male member to accompany her at Rajpura. It is thus prayed that in view of the extreme inconvenience and the hostile atmosphere she is to face at Rajpura from her husband side during her appearance before the Court at Rajpura, it is prayed that case under Section 9 of the Act be transferred to the court of competent jurisdiction from Rajpura to Kurukshetra.
Operative part
On the other hand learned counsel for the respondent/husband has opposed such a prayer. After hearing learned Counsel for the respondent/husband and keeping in view the facts of the present case and the inconvenience being suffered by the applicant-wife I deem it expedient in the interest of justice to order the transfer of petition under Section 9 of the Act filed by respondent husband Darshan Singh titled as Darshan Singh Vs. Sunita from Rajpura to the court of competent jurisdiction at Kurukshetra. Accordingly application is allowed and it is ordered that the Transfer Application No.226 of 2010 #3# petition titled as Darshan Singh Vs. Sunita be withdrawn from the court at Rajpura and transferred to the court of competent jurisdiction at Kurukshetra. Disposed of in the above terms. May 17, 2011 Vinay ( JASWANT SINGH ) JUDGE
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Accordingly application is allowed and it is ordered that the
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — s. 9; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 125.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Punjab & Haryana High Court, on 17 May 2011. The bench was JASWANT SINGH.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.