The convenience of the wife is a crucial factor in considering the transfer of matrimonial disputes, and the economic soundness of both parties should be taken into consideration.

JUDGMENT

Arvind Singh Sangwan, J. (Oral) - Prayer in this petition is for transfer of the petition filed under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, pending in the Family Court, Sonepat to the competent Court of jurisdiction at Rohtak. Vide order dated 27.10.2020, the following order was passed:-

'Petitioner-wife has filed this petition for transfer of case titled as 'Rajiv Hooda Versus Richa Hooda' under Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act filed by respondent-her husband from the Court of learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Principal Judge, Family Court, Sonipat to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Rohtak.

The marriage of petitioner with respondent was solemnized on 26.1.2001. One son was born to them on 30.5.2003. It is stated that petitioner is serving as PRT teacher in Model Town, Rohtak. Since from the very beginning, petitioner was humiliated by respondent and his family members on account of dowry. It is stated that petitioner out of her hard earned money purchased a plot at Rohtak. Petitioner is presently residing in ground floor of house whereas respondent is residing at first floor. On account of cruel attitude of respondent, petitioner has filed petition under Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act which is pending at Rohtak Courts. Respondent on the other hand solely with a view to harass the petitioner has filed a petition under Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act at Sonipat Courts which is at a distance of 50 kilometers from Rohtak. As petitioner is serving as a teacher in Rohtak, it is very difficult for her to attend the Court at Sonipat. Moreover, respondent is residing with petitioner in the same house at first floor.

Notice of motion for 22.12.2020.'

2. Counsel for the petitioner has argued that on account of a matrimonial discord, the respondent/husband has filed the petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, as a counter-blast, before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Sonepat.

3. Counsel for the petitioner has also argued that on account of a petition filed by the respondent/husband, the petitioner is facing great difficulty in prosecuting the said case as there is a distance of about 50 Kms from Rohtak to Sonepat.

4. Counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the judgments 'Sumita Singh vs Kumar Sanjay', 2002 SC 396 and 'Rajani Kishor Pardeshi vs Kishor Babulal Pardeshi', 2005(12) SCC 237, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed that while deciding the transfer application, the Courts are required to give more weightage and consideration to the convenience of the female litigants and transfer of legal proceedings from one Court to another should ordinarily be allowed, taking into consideration their convenience and the Courts should desist from putting female litigants under undue hardships.'

5. Counsel for the petitioner has also relied upon the judgment 'N.C.V. Aishwarya vs A.S. Saravana Karthik Sha,' 2022 Live Law (SC) 627, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed as under:-

9. The cardinal principle for exercise of power under section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure is that the ends of justice should demand the transfer of the suit, appeal or other proceeding. In matrimonial matters, wherever Courts are called upon to consider the plea of transfer, the Courts have to take into consideration the economic soundness of both the parties, the social strata of the spouses and their behavioural pattern, their standard of life prior to the marriage and subsequent thereto and the circumstances of both the parties in eking out their livelihood and under whose protective umbrella they are seeking their sustenance to life. Given the prevailing socioeconomic paradigm in the Indian society, generally, it is the wife's convenience which must be looked at while considering transfer.

10. Further, when two or more proceedings are pending in different Courts between the same parties which raise common question of fact and law, and when the decisions in the cases are interdependent, it is desirable t