Jammu & Kashmir High Court Directs Construction of Overhead Bridge or Underpass on Ring Road for Safe Passage of Villagers    |     Minor Injuries No Bar for Framing Charges Under Section 307 IPC if Intent to Kill is Present: Supreme Court    |     Prosecution's Case Full of Glaring Doubts:  Supreme Court Overturns Conviction in Abduction and Murder Case    |     Allegations of Dowry Demand in FIR Found Vague and Driven by Civil Property Dispute: Supreme Court Quashes FIR and Chargesheet in Dowry-Cruelty Case    |     Local Police Failed to Perform its Duties: SC Directs New Investigating Officer in Property Dispute    |     Paternity Established Through SSC and Appointment Order, Legal Obligation to Maintain Unmarried Daughter: Andhra Pradesh High Court    |     No Appeal Shall Be Heard Without Disputed Tax Deposit: Bombay High Court Upholds Constitutionality of Section 96(b) of the Cantonment Act, 2006    |     Parties Must Choose Peace Over Litigation: Calcutta High Court Denies FIR Quashing in Family Dispute, Highlights Mediation Option    |     Punjab & Haryana High Court Quashes Recruitment of 1091 Assistant Professors and 67 Librarians In Punjab Due to Procedural Flaws    |     Res Judicata Bars Reconsideration of Adoption Validity in Second Round of Litigation: Jammu & Kashmir High Court    |     Candidates who use a party’s symbol must be deemed members of that party: Kerala High Court Upholds Disqualification for Defection    |     Inconsistencies in Eyewitness Accounts and Lack of Forensic Certainty Lead to Acquittal: Himachal Pradesh High Court Acquits Accused in Murder Case    |     Delhi High Court Quashes Reassessment Notices Under Section 148 Due to Invalid Sanction by JCIT    |     Summons Under PMLA for Further Investigation Does Not Infringe Right Against Self-Incrimination: Telangana HC    |     Termination During Probation Is Lawful if Concealment of Criminal Case Is Proven: Allahabad HC    |     Disproportionate Fine Cannot Be Imposed for Recovery of 1 Liter of Country-made Liquor: Patna High Court    |     Prosecution failed to prove identity of remains and establish murder beyond reasonable doubt: Orissa High Court Acquit Ex-Husband    |     Despite 12 Injuries on the Victim, No Intention to Kill Found: Rajasthan High Court Upholds Conviction Under Section 304 Part-II IPC    |     Governor’s sanction suffers from non-application of mind: Karnataka High Court Stays Governor’s Sanction for Investigation Against CM Siddaramaiah    |    

Prioritizes Women’s Convenience in Matrimonial Case Transfers: P&H HC

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Punjab and Haryana High Court, with HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN presiding, delivered a verdict on October 16, 2023, emphasizing the convenience of female litigants in the transfer of matrimonial cases. The case in question involved a petition under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, seeking the transfer of proceedings from the Family Court in Amritsar to the Camp Court Patti in Tarn Taran.

The judgement recognized the petitioner’s claim that the minor girl child was in her custody and highlighted the complexities of the case, including the registration of FIR No.66 dated 05.06.2023, which invoked Sections 498-A, 406, and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). Despite attempted mediation, the proceedings had encountered difficulties due to the respondent’s uncooperative behavior.

The Court underscored the need to consider the economic soundness, social strata, and convenience of the wife in cases involving the transfer of matrimonial disputes. It was observed, “The prevailing socio-economic paradigm in Indian society dictates that it is the wife’s convenience that must be looked at while considering transfer.”

Furthermore, the judgement highlighted the importance of transferring cases that involve common questions of fact and law between the same parties. The Court stressed the desirability of trying such cases together to prevent multiplicity in trial and conflicts of decisions.

The decision was welcomed by legal experts and women’s rights advocates, citing the judgements in “Sumita Singh vs Kumar Sanjay” (2002) and “Rajani Kishor Pardeshi vs Kishor Babulal Pardeshi” (2005) from the Supreme Court, which emphasized the convenience of female litigants in transfer matters.

The representing advocate for the petitioner, Mr. Lupil Gupta, expressed satisfaction with the outcome. “This judgement recognizes the importance of prioritizing the convenience and well-being of female litigants in matrimonial cases,” he stated.

In conclusion, the High Court allowed the transfer petition, directing the transfer of the case to Camp Court Patti, Tarn Taran. The Court encouraged mediation and conciliation while imposing specific conditions on the respondent should he choose to contest the transfer.

This ruling sets a precedent for prioritizing the convenience and well-being of female litigants in matrimonial cases and aligns with the principles of justice and gender equality.

Date of Decision: 16.10.2023

Amandeep Kaur  vs Revail Singh             

         

[gview file="https://lawyerenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/16-Oct-23-Amandeep_Kaur_vs_Revail_Singh.pdf"]

Similar News