The Woman Must Show Convincing Reasons for Transferring the Marriage Case Initiated by Her; Not Essential, Only Transferable Business: Punjab and Haryana HC

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has said that transfer of matrimonial cases cannot be allowed merely because the spouse has moved to another place due to being in transferable employment.

Judge Sumeet Goel “Repeated transfer(s) of matrimonial case(s) cannot be permitted if the spouse in question is employed in a transferable job whose employment results in his/her transfer from one place to another. Another: When considering the defense of transfer of marital dispute, the “The freedom cannot be extended to the extent of applying to the Court for the transfer of such a marital dispute.”

In marital disputes, most of the time, when exercising its power to transfer the case, the court will change the venue of the hearing/hearing to the woman’s convenience (commute or primary caregiver of minor children or similar involvement factors) in order to resolve the extreme distress experienced by the wife/wife.

“Such an agreement should not be interpreted as an advantage granted to the spouse, but as a concession attributable solely and solely to the facilitation and speedy resolution of the trial,” he said.

The court emphasized that if the woman chooses to change her place of residence or is working in a job where she can work, the privilege cannot be claimed as a right and the case cannot be allowed to turn into a reason for repeated relocation. is frequently transferred.

These observations were made during the reading of the plea filed by a spouse seeking transfer of defense of maintenance under Section 407 of Cr.PC along with Section 482 of Cr.PC from Mohali of Punjab to Barnala.

After considering the allegations, the Court noted that the transfer was sought primarily because of the move from Mohali to Barnala.

Women’s Comfort is Not Absolutely True

The court said that the convenience of the woman is the most important factor in the transfer of marriage-related transactions, but this is not a matter of absolute rights granted to the woman.

He added that “convincing reasons” must be shown to transfer the case.

“So, in cases initiated/initiated on behalf of the husband, the suitability of the woman is undoubtedly an important factor to be taken into account. However, the reverse cannot be said to be equally valid. In a particular case; “If the spouse has initiated his own lawsuit in relation to the marital dispute, he will need to show relevant reasons for requesting the transfer of this case,” the Court said.

Justice Goel stated that the above reasoning alone “cannot be construed as a sufficient factor to direct the transfer of the maintenance proceedings initiated in his case”.

The court also explained that if the transfer petition is accepted, it will undoubtedly impose a financial burden on the husband.

In light of the above, the Court decided that no justification was given for the transfer of the alimony petition.

Mr. Manoj Singh, Advocate Mr. Simranjeet Singh, counsel for the petitioner.

Mr. Arvind Kashyap, Advocate for the Respondent.

Title: XXX and XXX