✦ Punjab & Haryana High Court · 27 Sep 2011

Smt.Jyoti v. Kamal Kant

TA No. 502 of 2011JITENDRA CHAUHAN2 min read

Case at a glance

Judgment

CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN Present: Mr.KB Raheja, Advocate for the applicant. Respondent -Kamal Kant in person. JITENDRA CHAUHAN, J.(Oral) *** The present application has been preferred by the applicant-wife, under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, praying for the transfer of the petition titled as ‘Kamal Kant Vs. Smt. Jyoti’, filed by the respondent-husband under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, (for short `the Act') from the Court of learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Chandigarh, to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Ferozepur. Respondent is present in person. He submits that he is a poor man and is unable to engage a counsel again at Ferozepur. I have heard the learned counsel for the applicant and perused the record. Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Neelam Kanwar vs TA No. 502 of 2011 2 Devinder Singh Kanwar, 2001(1) M.L.J. 509 (SC), has observed as under:- “We are mindful of the fact that the petitioner is a lady and first respondent is a male, and, therefore, for conveniencewise, a transfer to the place where the lady is residing, would be preferred by this Court unless, it is shown that there are special reasons not to do so.

No special reason is shown.” The applicant alongwith her two minor children is presently residing with her parents at Ferozepur, after having been ousted from her matrimonial home. There are averments of beatings and harassing. She has no source of income. The applicant has also filed an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C., which is pending at Ferozepur with a competent court. The petition filed by the applicant is prior in time. It would certainly be difficult for the wife, having no source of income and saddled with the responsibility of raising two minor children, to attend the court proceedings at Chandigarh, which is at a distance of 230 Kms. Keeping in view the above, the present application is allowed and the petition under Section 9 of the Act titled as ‘Kamal Kant Vs. Smt. Jyoti’ is withdrawn from the Court of learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Chandigarh and is transferred to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Ferozepur.

The entire record pertaining to TA No. 502 of 2011 3 the petition under Section 9 of the Act, shall be sent by the trial Court at Chandigarh, to the learned District Judge, Ferozepur, within three weeks, who will either dispose it of himself or entrust it to any other Court of competent jurisdiction at Ferozepur. The Trial court will provide the respondent -husband a counsel at the expenses of Punjab State Legal Services Authority. The parties through their counsels shall appear before the learned District Judge, Ferozepur, on 29.10.2011 at 10 AM.

27.09.2011 (JITENDRA CHAUHAN) JUDGE

Questions this judgment answers

Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — s. 24; 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 27 Sep 2011. The bench was JITENDRA CHAUHAN.

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.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Punjab & Haryana High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. TA No. 502 of 2011). ← Search more judgments