In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh ...... T.A. No.182 of 2008 ..... Date of decision:27.5.

2008 Tajinder Kaur .....Petitioner v. Sham Singh .....Respondent .... Present: Mr. Vinay Puri, Advocate for the petitioner. ......

S.S. Saron, J. (Oral) This transfer petition under Section 24 CPC read with Section 151 CPC has been filed seeking transfer of the petition under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (`Act' for short) filed by the respondent against the petitioner at Ludhiana to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Jalandhar. The marriage between the parties was solemnized on 14.12.2006 at Jalandhar. It is submitted that the parents of the petitioner spent an amount of Rs.10-12 Lacs on the marriage. However, later

matrimonial dispute arose between the parties. Out of the wedlock amongst themselves they had a female child on 8.11.2007, who according to the learned counsel, is residing with the respondent-husband. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the petitioner is a feeble lady and dependent on her father. Her mother recently died on 11.4.2008 due to tension and, therefore, it is submitted that the petition (Annexure-P.1) under Section 9 of the Act filed by the respondent

T.A. No.182 of 2008 [2] is liable to be transferred to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Jalandhar. I have given my thoughtful consideration to the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner and also perused the record. It may be noticed that in his petition (Annexure-P.1) filed by the respondent under Section 9 of the Act it has been stated that the parties last lived and cohabited as husband and wife at Ludhiana within the ordinary original and territorial jurisdiction of the said Court, therefore, the said Court has jurisdiction to try and entertain the petition. Therefore, the petition has been filed in accordance with the provisions of the Act by making necessary averments regarding territorial jurisdiction. It may also be noticed that the distance from Jalandhar to Ludhiana is not much and both are on National Highway No.1. The distance is about 60 Kms. and there is regular buses and also train service between both the stations. Insofar as insufficiency of funds for travelling, it may be noticed that on filing of necessary application by the petitioner before the Court before whom the petition under Section 9 of the Act is pending necessary and adequate travelling allowance can be allowed. In Anindita Das v Srijit Das, (2006) 9 SCC 197 it was observed that at one stage the Supreme Court was showing leniency to the ladies but since then it has been found that large number of transfer petitions are filed by women taking advantage of the leniency shown by the Supreme Court. Therefore, the leniency of the Supreme Court was being misused by the women. As such, it was now required to consider each petition on its merit. Therefore, considering the present petition on merit and keeping in view the fact that distance between Jalandhar and Ludhiana is 60 Kms. There is regular bus and train service, besides the fact that necessary

T.A. No.182 of 2008 [3] travelling allowance can be granted to the petitioner as also the fact that the minor daughter is with the respondent-husband, it would be just and expedient not to transfer the case pending before the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Ludhiana. dismissed. May 27, 2008. *hsp* (S.S. Saron) Judge Consequently, the transfer application is