Mr. Rameshwar Singh Malik, J. (Oral):- Applicant-wife, by way of instant transfer application under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, seeks transfer of divorce petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, (‘HM Act’ for short), filed by the respondent-husband, from Sirsa to Panchkula.

2. Notice of motion was issued and in compliance thereof, respondent filed his reply. Thereafter, the matter was referred to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre vide order dated 17.11.2014, but the parties could not arrive at an amicable settlement.

3. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant-wife submits that applicant, alongwith her minor daughter, is living at Panchkula. She is serving as JBT Teacher and posted at village Billah, District Panchkula. Distance between Panchkula and Sirsa is about 250 kilometers. In such a situation, it would be very difficult for the applicant to pursue the litigation imposed on her by respondent-husband, while going to Sirsa from Panchkula. He prays for allowing the present transfer application.

5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent-husband, while vehemently opposing instant transfer application, submits that the applicant has not approached this Court with clean hands. She was bent upon to cause maximum harassment to the respondent-husband, without there being any justified cause. He also places reliance on a judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Anindita Das Vs. Srijit Das, 2006 (9) SCC 197, judgment of this Court in Veena Vs. Vinay Kumar, 1992 (1) HLR 380 and order dated 17.2.2016 passed by this Court in TA No. 577 of 2015 (Surinder Pal Kaur Vs. Paramjit Singh), to contend that present transfer application is liable to be dismissed. He also submits that another criminal litigation between these very parties was transferred by this Court, vide order dated 13.10.2015 passed in CRM-M No. 2233 of 2015 against which the respondent-husband has approached the Hon’ble Supreme Court and said order dated 13.10.2015 has been stayed by Hon’ble the Supreme Court, vide its order dated 27.11.2015. He prays for dismissal of the present transfer application.

6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties at considerable length, after careful perusal of record of the case and giving thoughtful consideration to the rival contentions raised, this Court is of the considered opinion that keeping in view the totality of facts and circumstances of the case, noticed hereinabove, present transfer application deserves to be accepted and the divorce petition filed by the respondent-husband deserves to be transferred from Sirsa to Panchkula. To say so, reasons are more than one, which are being recorded hereinafter.

7. It has gone undisputed before this Court that applicant-wife, alongwith her minor child, is living at Panchkula. She is posted as JBT Teacher in a Government School in District Panchkula. Distance between Panchkula and Sirsa is about 250 Kms. Having said that, this Court feels no hesitation to conclude that applicant-wife would be facing great hardship in pursuing the litigation imposed on her by the respondent-husband, while going to Sirsa from Panchkula. The abovesaid peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case warrant transfer of divorce petition from Sirsa to Panchkula, so as to secure the ends of justice.

8. Learned counsel for the respondent-husband has repeatedly stressed on other litigation between the parties instead of referring to the peculiar fact situation of the present case. However, despite making his best efforts, he has failed to substantiate any of his arguments. So far as judgments relied upon by learned counsel for the respondent are concerned, there is no dispute about the observations made therein. However, on close perusal of the cited judgments, the same have not been found to be of any help to the respondent, being distinguishable on facts.

9. It is the settled principle of law that peculiar facts of