JUDGMENT

Nidhi Gupta, J. (Oral)

CM-873-CII-2023

This is an application under section 151 CPC for exemption from filing certified/typed/more legible copies of the documents i.e. Annexure P1 to P4.

After going through the contents of the application, the same is allowed subject to just all exceptions.

Main Case

Prayer in this petition filed by petitioner-wife is for transfer of petition filed by respondent-husband under section 13 of the HINDU MARRIAGE ACT , bearing No.HMA/9796/2022 titled " Raman Kumar v. Harminder Kaur " pending in the Family Court, Ludhiana, to a Court of competent jurisdiction at Patiala.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, submits that:

i) that the parties were married on 05.02.2016;

ii) that one son was born out of the wedlock on 24.02.2017;

iii) that the petitioner along with her minor son, who is studying in Guru Nanak Foundation Public School, Patiala, is living with her parents at Patiala;

iv) that distance between place of residence and place of proceedings is about 100 kms. (one side);

v) that the petitioner has also filed an application for registering FIR against the respondent and his family, which is pending before the Senior Superintendent of Police, Patiala.

vi) that the petitioner has no source of income.

3. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

4. The legal position in such like cases as the present one, is well established. In this regard, judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in N.C.V. Aishwarya v. A.S. Saravana Karthik Sha ," 2022 Live Law (SC) 627, is most relevant wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held 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 socio-economic 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 that they should be tried together by the same Judge so as to avoid multiplicity in trial of the same issues and conflict of decisions."

5. Further reliance can be placed upon the judgments in " Sumita Singh v. Kumar Sanjay " , AIR 2002 SC 396 and " Rajani Kishor Pardeshi v. 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."

6. Even this Court in number of cases has followed the aforesaid principle of law. Accordingly, it is well settled that while considering the transfer of a matrimonial dispute/case, at the instance of the wife, the Court is to consider the family condition of the wife, the custody of the minor child, economic condition of the wife, her