IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND
HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
T.A. No.18 of 2009
Date of decision: August 18, 2009.
Neelamjit Kaur & Ors.
...Petitioner(s)
v.
Tejinder Singh
...Respondent(s)
CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.S. Bedi
1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?
2. Whether to be referred to the Reporters or not ?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?
Present: Shri Deepak Sabharwal, Advocate, for the petitioners.
None for the respondent.
ORDER
M.M.S. Bedi, J. – (Oral):
Counsel for the petitioner states that his presence has been
wrongly marked for the respondent vide order dated 5.5.2009. A perusal of
the report of the Office indicates that respondent has been served. Today,
no one has put in appearance on behalf of the respondent. The respondent
is accordingly proceeded against ex-parte.
This is a petition under Section 24 of the Code of Civil
Procedure for transfer of the proceedings under Section 9 of the Hindu
Marriage Act filed by the respondent at Chandigarh to the court of
competent jurisdiction at Kapurthala on the ground of convenience.
The petitioner No.1 is staying with her two minor children at
Kapurthala and has also filed a petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. at
Kapurthala. The respondent is stated to be serving as a Constable in the
Punjab Police, with posting at Police Headquarters, Chandigarh. It will not
be of much inconvenience to the respondent to pursue his application under
Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, which is pending at Chandigarh
whereas it will be highly inconvenient for the petitioner to come to
Chandigarh to contest the petition along with her minor children as it is
claimed that there are reasonable grounds for staying away from the
respondent on account of his cruel behaviour.
In the interest of justice, the petition under Section 9 of the
Hindu Marriage Act and pending in the court of Civil Judge (Junior
Division), Chandigarh, complete in all respects, is ordered to be transferred
to the court of Civil Judge (Senior Division), Kapurthala and the same be
accordingly sent to the District Judge, Kapurthala.
The parties are directed to appear before the Civil Judge
(Senior Division), Kapurthala on 23.10.2009. As the proceedings before the
trial court had been stayed, the respondent as well as the petitioners shall be
issued notices about the present proceedings. After the transfer of the case
to Kapurthala, the court of Civil Judge (Senior Division), Kapurthala will
issue notice to the respondent in case he does not appear on the date fixed.
August 18, 2009. [ M.M.S. Bedi ] kadyan Judge