JUDGMENT

ARUN MONGA, J. (ORAL)—

1. Applicant-wife seeks transfer of petition filed by the respondent-husband under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 bearing HMA/549/2018 titled as “Jaspal Singh @ Jassa Vs. Simranjit Kaur” pending in the Court of learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Ludhiana to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Amritsar.

2. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. seeking grant of maintenance and petition under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for restitution of conjugal rights filed by the applicant-wife are already pending at Amritsar.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that applicant is residing at Amritsar with her old age mother. She has no source of income. The distance between Ludhiana and Amritsar is about 140 kms. Therefore, it is difficult for her to go to Ludhiana on each date of hearing.

4. Learned counsel for the respondent appears and opposes the transfer application saying that 04 children born out of the wedlock i.e. two daughters and two sons, who are school going and are residing with the respondent-husband except the elder daughter being married.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record of the case.

6. All the cases pending between the parties are aftermath of matrimonial discord. Keeping in view the contentions in the application and the fact that petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. seeking grant of maintenance and petition under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for restitution of conjugal rights are already pending at Amritsar it would be proper, appropriate and in the interest of justice if all the cases are tried and decided at one place.

7. Reference may also be had to the observations made by Hon'ble the Supreme Court of India in cases titled as “Sumita Singh Vs. Kumar Sanjay and another”, AIR 2002 SC 396 and Rajni Kishor Pardeshi v. Kishor Babulal Pardeshi” 2005 (12) SCC 237, wherein it was observed that in matrimonial matters, convenience of wife is to be preferred over the convenience of husband.

8. Even otherwise, the ethos as manifested under Article 51-A of Constitution of India also envisages that it shall be fundamental duty of every citizen of India to uphold the dignity of woman. In addition, per Article 15 (3), power has also been conferred on the State to make special provisions for women and children.

9. It was perhaps in this spirit that an amendment was inserted by Act 50 of 2003 with effect from 23.12.2003 in Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, whereby, in case of a wife being the petitioner, jurisdiction was conferred to the Court within local limits of whose ordinary original civil jurisdiction, the wife is residing on the date of presentation of the petition. In fact the very statement of objects and reasons of the Bill whereby Clause (iiia) was inserted in Section 19 (i) of HMA, by way of marriage laws (Amendment Act 2003) is as below :

“The Special Marriage Act, 1954 and the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 provide that a petition for relief under the provisions of these Acts shall be presented to the District Court within the limits of whose original civil jurisdiction the marriage was solemnized or the respondent, at the time of the presentation of the petition, resided or the parties to the marriage last resided together or the petitioner was residing at the time of the presentation of the petition, in a case where the respondent was at the time residing outside the territories to which these Acts extended or had not been heard of as being alive for a period of seven years by those who would naturally have heard of him if he were alive. However, these provisions are not considered adequate or fair as far the women are concerned. Under the existing provisions, a petition cannot be filed by the aggrieved wife to the District Court within the local limits of whose ordinary jurisdiction she may be residing. In view thereof, the Government has decided to amend the provisions of these Acts so that the wife can also file petition in the District Court within local limits of whose jurisdiction she may be residing.”

10. After the aforesaid amendment, husband can only institute proceedings, either where marriage was solemnized or where the wife is residing or where the parties last resided together. Only in a case where wife is residing outside India, the husband can institute proceedings where he is residing. Whereas, wife can also file a petition in the District Court within the local limits of whose jurisdiction she herself may be residing. The said right has been exclusively conferred on a wife obviously keeping her convenience in mind in the matrimonial matters.

11. In the premise, present application is allowed. The petition in question pending before the Court of learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Ludhiana is ordered to be withdrawn from that Court and is transferred to the District Judge, Amritsar for its disposal in accordance with law by the Court concerned.

Application allowed.

********