ORDER

1. By presenting this petition under Section 25 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, the petitioner-wife seeks transfer of proceedings instituted by the respondent-husband under Section 25 of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 bearing Case No. GW 3/2023, titled “Manoj Kumar vs. Preeti”, from the Court of the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Chandigarh to the Family Court, West District, New Delhi or any other court of competent jurisdiction at New Delhi, on the grounds urged therein.

2. This transfer petition was considered by an Hon’ble Judge on 14.08.2023. In the third paragraph it has been recorded that the petitioner-wife is residing in New Delhi. According to the petitioner-wife, she has been residing in Chandigarh although she has her office in Panchkula.

3. Since there has been an erroneous recording of the place of residence of the petitioner-wife in the third paragraph of the order dated Digitally signed by Rajni Mukhi Date: 2023.09.25 19:10:44 IST Reason:

Signature Not Verified 14.08.2023, an application (I.A No. 171122 of 2023) has been moved on her behalf for rectification of the said order dated 14.08.2023.

4. I.A No. 171122 of 2023 stands disposed of by clarifying that the order dated 14.08.2023 recording that the place of residence of the petitioner- wife is Delhi should be read as Chandigarh.

5. By the said order dated 14.08.2023, notice was issued to the respondent-husband. He has entered appearance and has also filed a counter affidavit.

6. In the presence of the learned counsel for the parties, the transfer petition is taken up for consideration. The prayer for transfer is essentially based on the apprehension of the petitioner-wife that since she has been serving on a transferable post and there is an imminent possibility of her transfer out of Panchkula, the proceedings of GW 3/2023 may be transferred to the Courts at New Delhi where matrimonial proceedings between the parties are pending.

7. The aforesaid prayer of the petitioner-wife is vehemently opposed by learned counsel for the respondent-husband. According to him, the child of the parties is presently in the custody of the petitioner-wife and he has been residing with her in Chandigarh; and, without caring for the interest of the child, the petitioner-wife seeks to have the proceedings transferred from a Court which is 2 kms away from his (child’s) residence to a Court which is 250 kms away.

8. Having bestowed serious consideration to the rival contentions, this Court is of the view that no order for transfer ought to be passed on mere assumptions and apprehensions of the parties. As at present, Panchkula remains to be the place of office of the petitioner-wife and it is also not in dispute that Chandigarh is the place of her residence as well as that of the child. The interest of the child being of paramount importance, at this stage, this Court finds no reason to grant the prayer for transfer.

9. The Transfer Petition stands dismissed, without costs.

10. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.

………………………………………J.

10. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.

………………………………………J. [DIPANKAR DATTA] NEW DELHI; SEPTEMBER 22, 2023 ITEM NO.1602 COURT NO.5 SECTION IV-B S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS Transfer Petition(s)(Civil) No(s). 2154/2023 PREETI Petitioner(s) VERSUS MANOJ KUMAR Respondent(s) IA No. 171122/2023 - APPLICATION FOR RECTIFICATION IA No. 152181/2023 - EX-PARTE STAY Date : 22-09-2023 These matter was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPANKAR DATTA For Petitioner(s) Mr. Akanksha Sisodia, Adv. Mr. Pulkit Tare, AOR For Respondent(s) Mr. Setu Niket, Adv. Ms. Esha Mazumdar, Ad