IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Sr. No.115 Date of Decision: 08.09.2025 PUSHPA VATI @ PUSHPA ....Applicant Versus PAWAN KUMAR SHARMA .....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE ARCHANA PURI Present:- Mr. Rajesh Lamba, Advocate for the applicant.

Mr. Sandeep Kotla, Advocate for the respondent.

*****

ARCHANA PURI, J. (Oral)

The applicant-maternal grandmother of the subject child, has filed the present application for seeking transfer of the guardianship petition GW/21/2024, titled ‘Pawan Kumar Vs. Pushpa’, filed by the respondent (father of the child), pending in the Family Court (Camp Court) Firozepur Jhirka, District Nuh, and she seeks transfer of the same to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Gurugram.

Upon notice, the respondent made appearance through counsel and filed reply.

Counsel for the parties heard.

At the very outset, it is submitted by the counsel for the applicant that the daughter of the applicant was married to the respondent- Pawan Kumar Sharma and from their wedlock, one son was born on 01.12.2015. The said child was born in Gurugram and copy of his birth certificate is Annexure P-2. On account of the matrimonial dispute, the daughter of the applicant, as well as the respondent indulged into various rounds of litigation, as a result whereof, the daughter of the applicant had committed suicide. Even, FIR bearing No.26 dated 14.02.2024 was got registered at Police Station Pinangwa, District Nuh and the respondent is facing trial relating to the same. Besides the same, also it is submitted that the applicant is residing in Gurugram and the child, who is 10 years old, is studying in G.A.V. International School, Gurugram. The distance between the two places is stated to be about 60 kilometres. To commute such a distance, in order to make appearance before the Courts at Nuh, shall be too taxing for the applicant.

Even, counsel for the applicant has made reference to various documents placed on record, thereby showing about the subject child to be born and studying at Gurugram and also substantiating about the applicant to be residing in a rented premises at Gurugram. Besides the same, also counsel for the applicant has made reference to the orders passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court and also to the copy of the Aadhar Card, thereby depicting about the present address of the applicant-Pushpa Vati @ Pushpa, in Gurugram. In the given circumstances, it is prayed that the guardian petition be transferred to Gurugram.

On the other hand, counsel for the respondent, while making reference to the reply, submits that the present transfer application has been filed, as a tool of harassment. The subject child is not residing at Gurugram and in fact, he is residing with his maternal grandmother i.e. the applicant, as well as his maternal uncle, at Nuh. The transfer of the case is sought to Gurugram, only with a purpose to cause harassment to the respondent and this is taking advantage of the provision of transfer. In this regard, counsel has placed reliance upon the judgment passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case titled ‘Anindita Das Vs. Srijit Das’, (2006) 9 SCC 197, to emphasize that the advantage of leniency shall not to given by the Courts, while considering the transfer application.

In view of the submissions aforesaid, it is pertinent to mention that even though, generally the Courts lean towards convenience of woman, while considering transfer application relating to matrimonial dispute, but however, it is not a thumb rule. Various other circumstances, spelt out from the material brought on record, ought to be taken into consideration. Each case has to be appraised in its own factual background.

In the case in hand, the daughter of the applicant was married to the respondent and from this wedlock, one son was born on 01.12.2015. However, on account of the matrimonial dispute, the daughter of the applicant, as well as the respondent indulged in various rounds of litigation. The deceased daughter of the app