Order XLI Rule 23A CPC | Re-Trial Necessary When Crucial Parties Impleaded In Appeal: Telangana High Court Cannot Freeze Entire Bank Account For Small Disputed Sums: Rajasthan High Court Issues Comprehensive Guidelines Against Indiscriminate Account Freezes In Cyber Crime Probes 187(3) BNSS | No Extension Of Investigation Time Without Notice To Accused: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Default Bail In NDPS Case Road Widening Under Master Plan Cannot Be Stalled For Formal Land Acquisition, Section 305 Permits Direct Removal Of Encroachments: Madhya Pradesh High Court P&H High Court Quashes Preventive Detention Over 45-Day Delay In Informing Detenu Of Right To Represent 'Sole Allegation Of Torture Cannot Stand Alone': Andhra Pradesh High Court Acquits Husband Under Section 498A IPC After Dowry Demand Disproved Seeking Corroboration To Victim's Testimony Amounts To Adding Insult To Injury: Bombay High Court Upholds Rape Conviction Offences Of Cheating & Criminal Breach Of Trust Cannot Coexist On Same Facts: Calcutta High Court Quashes FIR Over Commercial Contract Dispute "Accident Alone Is Not Proof": Delhi High Court Acquits Bus Driver In 2003 Road Fatality Case, Rules Mere Speeding Or Collision Insufficient For Section 304A IPC Mandate Of Regulations Must Be Read Into Public Notices: Kerala High Court Reverses Order Directing NMC To Reopen Portal For Medical College's PG Seat Hike Unproven 1946 Oral Sale And Subsequent School Gift Cannot Convey Valid Title Over Tribal Land: Orissa High Court Orders Compensation After 80 Years ED Can Probe Money Laundering In J&K Corruption Cases: J&K High Court Rules S. 5(1)(d) J&K PC Act Corresponds To Amended S. 7 Of Central PC Act Not Mere Lip Service: Supreme Court Quashes GST Notice Under Section 74 Lacking Foundational Facts Of Fraud Or Suppression Selling Manufactured Goods At Factory Premises Doesn't Turn 'Industrial' Land Into 'Commercial' For Stamp Duty: Supreme Court Supreme Court Orders All States To Form Dedicated SITs To Probe Fake Motor Accident Claims, Warns Insurance Top Brass Against Selective Referrals Port Trusts Not Immune From Customs Duty On Pilfered Goods: Supreme Court Upholds Notification Declaring Mumbai Port Trust As Custodian Under Section 45

Convenience of the Wife a Major Concern”: Punjab and Haryana High Court Allows Transfer of Matrimonial Case to Faridkot

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a landmark judgement, the Punjab and Haryana High Court permitted the transfer of a matrimonial dispute case from the Family Court in Dera Bassi to Faridkot. The ruling comes as a relief to the petitioner-wife, Ravneet Kaur, who cited substantial inconvenience due to the distance between the two locations.

Presided over by Hon’ble Mr. Justice Arvind Singh Sangwan, the High Court observed, “It is well settled that while considering the transfer of a matrimonial dispute/case at the instance of the wife, the Court is to consider family condition of the wife, custody of the minor child, economic condition of the wife, her physical health and earning capacity of the husband and most important, convenience of the wife.”

The decision was made after considering several factors, including the family condition of the wife, her economic situation, and physical health. The Court was also guided by the principle that “Courts should desist from putting female litigants under undue hardships.”

The Court further added, “Given the prevailing socio-economic paradigm in the Indian society, generally, it is the wife’s convenience which must be looked at while considering transfer.”

The judgement cited three significant Supreme Court decisions, including Sumita Singh Vs. Kumar Sanjay, Rajani Kishor Pardeshi Vs. Kishor Babulal Pardeshi, and N.C.V. Aishwarya Vs. A.S. Saravana Karthik Sha, to back its ruling.

As part of the conditions for the transfer, both parties are directed to appear before the Family Court in Faridkot within one month from today. The Court also encouraged exploration of amicable resolution through the Mediation and Conciliation Centre.

The respondent-husband, Sumit Kumar, is granted liberty to contest this decision provided he meets specific conditions like clearing any arrears in maintenance and contributing towards the litigation expenses of the petitioner.

Date of decision: 11.09.2023

Ravneet Kaur vs Sumit Kumar  

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/Ravneet_Kaur_vs_Sumit_Kumar_on_11_September_2023_PH_HC.pdf"]

Latest Legal News