1 TA-825-2025 (O&M) 302 IN THE HIGH CCOURT OF PUNJAB AND HAARYANA AT CHANDIGARH TA-825-2025 (O&M)) Datee of Decision: July 15, 20266 KAWALJOT KAAUR VASIR ........Applicant Versus RANJODH SINNGH VASIR ........Respondent CORAM: HONN'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKEESH MANUJA Present: Ms. Divya Gulati, Advocate for thhe applicant. Mrr. J.S. Bhatia, Advocate for thee respondent. **** HARKESH MAANUJA, J. (ORAL) 1. The appplicant-wife, by way of presennt application, seeks transferr of petition bearing HMA/624/2022, titled ““Ranjot Singh vs. Kawaljott Kaur”, filed uunder Section 10 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 19555 (hereinafter too be referred as “the Act”) aat the instance of respondent--husband; from the Court of learned Prinncipal Judge, Family Court, Gurdaspur to leearned Principal Judge, Famil y Court, Amritsar. 2. Briefly staating, the marriage between tthe applicant and respondentt was solemnizeed on 03.07.2016; out of thheir wedlock, a female childd namely, Jannattpreet Kaur was born; on account of matrimonial discordd between the paarties, the above mentioned petition under Section 10 off the Act, came to be preferred at the instaance of respondent-husband. Thereupon, thee present application seekingg transfer thereof came to bee filed by the app licant-wife. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant, iinter alia, contends that thee applicant-wife iss residing alongwith her daugghter at her parental home att Amritsar. Accoordingly, a prayer is made for transfer of the abovee

TEJWINDER SINGH 2026.07.17 10:59 I agree to specified portions of this document 2 TA-825-2025 (O&M) mentioned petition filed at the instance of respondent-husband from Family Court, Gurdaspur to Family Court, Amritsar. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent vehemently opposes the prayer made on behalf of the applicant while stating that respondent-husband has to take care of his mother who is not keeping good health whereas, petitioner-wife is residing with her parents having support from her entire family including her brothers. Learned counsel for respondent further submits that the distance between Amritsar and Gurdaspur is approximately 60 kilometers and thus, it will not be inconvenient for petitioner-wife to attend the hearing. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the paper-book. 6. In the present case, admittedly, the applicant-wife has filed a petition under Section 144 of BNSS for grant of maintenance , which is pending adjudication before the learned Family Court at Amritsar. Besides it, the applicant is also taking care of her daughter, namely, Jannatpreet Kaur.

7. Furthermore, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in its decision rendered in “Manjula Singh Chouhan Versus Vishal Singh Chouhan”, reported as 2019 (13) SCC 660 held that, in the interest of both the parties, all connected matrimonial proceedings should ordinarily be heard by the same Court and, accordingly, allowed the transfer application therein. Relevant paragraphs No. 3 to 5 thereof are reproduced hereunder:-“3. As per the submission of the appellant, two cases are already pending in Family Court, Bhopal, and it will be in the interests of both the parties to try all their cases in Bhopal. Learned counsel for the respondent however, submits that it will suit to the appellant only, therefore, transfer may not be permitted. The fact remains that the respondent has to travel to Bhopal for conduct of other cases pending in Family Court, Bhopal. 4. We are of the view that it will be in the interests of both the parties that TEJWINDER SINGH 2026.07.17 10:59 I agree to specified portions of this document 3 TA-825-2025 (O&M) all their cases be heard together by the same Court. 5. Therefore, H.M.A. Case No.71/2016 is transferred from Family Court, Indore to the Family Court, Bhopal.”

8. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, in the humble opinion of this Court, since a maintenance petition under Section 144 BNSS is pending adjudication at Amritsar, therefore, it would be in the interest of both the parties that all their cases be heard together at the same place. Consequently the transfer application is allowed and the petition under Section 10 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 i.e. HMA/624/2022, titled ““Ranjot Singh vs. Kawaljot Kaur”, filed by the respondent-husband, stands transferred from the Court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Gurdaspur to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Amritsar. The requisite record of the aforesaid case be sent by the learned Family Court, Gurdaspur to the Court concerned. 9. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. 15.07.2026 (HARKESH MANUJA) Tejwinder JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No TEJWINDER SINGH 2026.07.17 10:59 I agree to specified portions of this document

1 TA-825-2025 (O&M) 302 IN THE HIGH CCOURT OF PUNJAB AND HAARYANA AT CHANDIGARH TA-825-2025 (O&M)) Datee of Decision: July 15, 20266 KAWALJOT KAAUR VASIR ........Applicant Versus RANJODH SINNGH VASIR ........Respondent CORAM: HONN'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKEESH MANUJA Present: Ms. Divya Gulati, Advocate for thhe applicant. Mrr. J.S. Bhatia, Advocate for thee respondent. **** HARKESH MAANUJA, J. (ORAL) 1. The appplicant-wife, by way of presennt application, seeks transferr of petition bearing HMA/624/2022, titled ““Ranjot Singh vs. Kawaljott Kaur”, filed uunder Section 10 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 19555 (hereinafter too be referred as “the Act”) aat the instance of respondent--husband; from the Court of learned Prinncipal Judge, Family Court, Gurdaspur to leearned Principal Judge, Famil y Court, Amritsar. 2. Briefly staating, the marriage between tthe applicant and respondentt was solemnizeed on 03.07.2016; out of thheir wedlock, a female childd namely, Jannattpreet Kaur was born; on account of matrimonial discordd between the paarties, the above mentioned petition under Section 10 off the Act, came to be preferred at the instaance of respondent-husband. Thereupon, thee present application seekingg transfer thereof came to bee filed by the app licant-wife. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant, iinter alia, contends that thee applicant-wife iss residing alongwith her daugghter at her parental home att Amritsar. Accoordingly, a prayer is made for transfer of the abovee

TEJWINDER SINGH 2026.07.17 10:59 I agree to specified portions of this document 2 TA-825-2025 (O&M) mentioned petition filed at the instance of respondent-husband from Family Court, Gurdaspur to Family Court, Amritsar. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent vehemently opposes the prayer made on behalf of the applicant while stating that respondent-husband has to take care of his mother who is not keeping good health whereas, petitioner-wife is residing with her parents having support from her entire family including her brothers. Learned counsel for respondent further submits that the distance between Amritsar and Gurdaspur is approximately 60 kilometers and thus, it will not be inconvenient for petitioner-wife to attend the hearing. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the paper-book. 6. In the present case, admittedly, the applicant-wife has filed a petition under Section 144 of BNSS for grant of maintenance , which is pending adjudication before the learned Family Court at Amritsar. Besides it, the applicant is also taking care of her daughter, namely, Jannatpreet Kaur.

7. Furthermore, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in its decision rendered in “Manjula Singh Chouhan Versus Vishal Singh Chouhan”, reported as 2019 (13) SCC 660 held that, in the interest of both the parties, all connected matrimonial proceedings should ordinarily be heard by the same Court and, accordingly, allowed the transfer application therein. Relevant paragraphs No. 3 to 5 thereof are reproduced hereunder:-“3. As per the submission of the appellant, two cases are already pending in Family Court, Bhopal, and it will be in the interests of both the parties to try all their cases in Bhopal. Learned counsel for the respondent however, submits that it will suit to the appellant only, therefore, transfer may not be permitted. The fact remains that the respondent has to travel to Bhopal for conduct of other cases pending in Family Court, Bhopal. 4. We are of the view that it will be in the interests of both the parties that TEJWINDER SINGH 2026.07.17 10:59 I agree to specified portions of this document 3 TA-825-2025 (O&M) all their cases be heard together by the same Court. 5. Therefore, H.M.A. Case No.71/2016 is transferred from Family Court, Indore to the Family Court, Bhopal.”

8. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, in the humble opinion of this Court, since a maintenance petition under Section 144 BNSS is pending adjudication at Amritsar, therefore, it would be in the interest of both the parties that all their cases be heard together at the same place. Consequently the transfer application is allowed and the petition under Section 10 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 i.e. HMA/624/2022, titled ““Ranjot Singh vs. Kawaljot Kaur”, filed by the respondent-husband, stands transferred from the Court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Gurdaspur to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Amritsar. The requisite record of the aforesaid case be sent by the learned Family Court, Gurdaspur to the Court concerned. 9. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. 15.07.2026 (HARKESH MANUJA) Tejwinder JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No TEJWINDER SINGH 2026.07.17 10:59 I agree to specified portions of this document