The court prioritizes the convenience of the wife and welfare of the minor child in transfer applications under matrimonial and guardianship laws.

JUDGMENT

Mr. Sanjay Vashisth, J. - (Oral)

This judgment shall dispose of two transfer applications, filed under section 24 CPC, bearing TA-947-2022 and TA-1081-2022, by the applicant/petitioner.

In TA-947-2022, the petitioner-wife, has sought transfer of the petition, bearing No. HMA/139/2022, filed by the respondent-husband, under section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, titled as "Jatinder Singh v. Harjeet Kaur", pending in the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Amritsar, to any Court of competent jurisdiction at Ferozepur.

In TA-1081-2022, the petitioner-wife, has sought transfer of the petition, bearing No. GW/26/2022, under sections 8 and 25 of the Guardians And Wards Act, 1890, titled as "Harjeet Kaur v. Jatinder Singh", filed by the applicant/petitioner herself, pending in the Court of Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Amritsar, to any Court of competent jurisdiction at Ferozepur.

2. The aforementioned transfer petitions have been filed, inter alia, on the following grounds:-

i) Petitioner-wife and respondent-husband got married on 30.01.2015, at Royal Palace, Ferozepur City, according to the Sikh rites and ceremonies, and they separated from each other on 22.03.2021.

ii) Out of the said wedlock, one male child, namely, Arman Singh, was born on 29.10.2016, now aged more than 7 years.

iii) Initially applicant/petitioner alongwith minor son was turned out of the matrimonial home on 22.03.2021. Lateron, due to intervention of Iqbal Singh Sehdev, who is maternal uncle of respondent-husband, custody of minor son was taken over by the respondent-husband on the pretext that after 3-4 days custody of minor son would again be handed over to the applicant/petitioner. However, they resiled from their promise. Thus, the applicant/petitioner was constrained to file petition bearing No. GW/26/2022, under sections 8 and 25 of the Guardians And Wards Act, 1890, titled as "Harjeet Kaur v. Jatinder Singh", in the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Amritsar.

iv) Due to matrimonial discord, applicant/petitioner has also filed a petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C.; petition under section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955; and complaint under the Domestic Violence Act, which are pending adjudication in the Courts at Ferozepur, and respondent-husband is also appearing in those proceedings. However, just to harass the applicant/petitioner, respondent-husband has instituted the petition under section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, at Amritsar, on false and baseless grounds.

v) To attend proceedings in the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Amritsar, applicant/petitioner has to cover a distance of about 120 Kms. (one side).

vi) Petitioner-wife is financially dependent on her parents, and lacks convenient transportation options, thus, is compelled to rely on public transit, resulting in significant hardships.

vii) Financial condition of the parental home of the petitioner-wife is also not sound, and her parental family lives in a hand to mouth condition.

viii) Due to extreme hardships, the applicant/petitioner is left with no option but to seek transfer of petition under sections 8 and 25 of the Guardians And Wards Act, 1890, filed by herself, as well, besides transfer of petition filed by respondent-husband, under section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, from Amritsar to Ferozepur.

3. Learned counsel for the respondent-husband vehemently opposed the prayer made in the present transfer applications and argued that as per section 9 of the Guardians And Wards Act, 1890, petition could be instituted only at the place where the child resides, and in the present case, admittedly the custody of the minor child is with the respondent-husband, who is a resident of Amritsar.

4. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and gone through the material available on record.

5. I do not find any force in the argument advanced by learned counsel for the respondent-husband. Probably, provision of section 9 of the Guardians And Wards A