$~64

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ TR.P.(C.) 5/2026 & CM APPL. 2330/2026 Stay

SUMAN YADAV .....Petitioner

Through: Mr. Vaibhav Vats, Adv. (DHCLSC)

versus

JITENDER BAHADUR

.....Respondent

Through: None.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT SHARMA

O R D E R

% 14.01.2026

1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

CM APPL. 2331/2026 (Exemption)

2. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. The present application is

allowed and disposed of.

TR.P.(C.) 5/2026 & CM APPL. 2330/2026 Stay

3. The present petition under Section 24 read with Section 151 of the CPC

seeks the following prayers: -

“a. Allow the present Transfer Petition and transfer the case no. a. HMA NO . 1002 / 2025, titled JTIENDER BAHADUR V/S. SUMAN YADAV, pending before Ld. Judge, Family Court - 02, Central, TIs Hazari Court, Delhi to the court of Ld. Principal Judge

- New Delhi District, Patiala House, New Delhi;

b. Pass any other appropriate order that this Hon'ble Court may

deem fit in the circumstances of the case.”

4. By way of the present petition, the petitioner is seeking transfer of HMA No.1002/2025 titled as ‘Jitender Bahadur v. Suman Yadva’ pending Delhi, to the Court of learned Principal Judge, New Delhi District, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi.

5. The aforesaid HMA petition, initially OS No.1344/2024, was filed by the respondent seeking dissolution of marriage on 17.09.2024 in Rai Bareilly, UP, and on a Transfer Petition(s) Civil No(s).3401 of 2024, under Section 25 of the CPC filed at the instance of the petitioner, the Hon’ble Supreme Court vide order dated 01.05.2025, had transferred the same to the Court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Central District, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi.

6. It is submitted that on account of confusion relating to the jurisdiction of the correct district, the aforesaid transfer was made to Central District, Delhi, instead of New Delhi District, New Delhi, within the territorial jurisdiction of which the petitioner resides with her children.

7. It is pertinent to note that the petitioner had already instituted a petition, MT No.122/24, under Section 144 of the BNSS (Section 125 of the CrPC) seeking grant of maintenance from the respondent before the Court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi, prior to the filing of the aforesaid transfer petition before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, which was decided vide order dated 01.05.2025. Thus, despite the pendency of the said petition before learned Family Court, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi, the divorce petition filed by the respondent was transferred by the Hon’ble Supreme Court to learned Judge, Family Court-02, Central Tis Hazari Court, Delhi.

8. Even otherwise, since the divorce petition, HMA No.1002/2025, was pursuance of the order dated 01.05.2025 passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, it will not be appropriate for this Court to transfer the same.

9. In view thereof, the present petition is dismissed and disposed of.

10. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of accordingly.

AMIT SHARMA, J JANUARY 14, 2026/kr/ns