Sec 24 of cpc
PARTHA SARKAR
(Querist) 01 April 2012
This query is : Resolved
I will be grateful if the penal of experts help me to reject transfer petition u/s 24 of CPC in favour of Husband.
If any judgment available in favour of husband it may help me to fight against the case.
Nadeem Qureshi
(Expert) 02 April 2012
Dear Sarkar
first of all tell me, what are the ground for rejection of the TP?
Raj Kumar Makkad
(Expert) 02 April 2012
1. K. Subbarao versus M/s. Laxminarayana Complex AIR 1996 Karnatka 127
2. Sunita Singh versus Kumar Sanjay AIR 2002 SC 396.
Deepak Nair
(Expert) 02 April 2012
Sufficiently guided by Mr.Makkad
Adv.R.P.Chugh
(Expert) 02 April 2012
Mr.Sarkar,
Transfer Petitions turn on the peculiar facts of the case, the doctrine of forum convinience, the comparative convinience or inconvinience (Balance of Convinience) caused by trial at a particular place, the rights of the suitor as dominus litus. All these are required to be considered.
ajay sethi
(Expert) 02 April 2012
Punjab-Haryana High Court
Harjinder Kaur vs Narinder Singh Mangat on 4 January, 2012
TA No.601 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
TA No.601 of 2011
Date of decision: 4.1.2012
Harjinder Kaur
….Applicant
Versus
Narinder Singh Mangat
…Respondent
CORAM: HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN
Present: Mr.Gopal Sharma, Advocate for the applicant. Mr.Arvind Kashyap, Advocate for the respondent *****
Jitendra Chauhan, J.(Oral)
The present application under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure has been filed by the applicant/wife, seeking transfer of the petition titled as `Narinder Singh Mangat vs. Harjinder Kaur’, filed by the respondent/husband under Section 11 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, (for short `the Act’) from the court of learned Additional District Judge, Fatehgarh Sahib, to any other court of competent jurisdiction at Mohali. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the case file.
There is no force in the arguments of the learned counsel for the applicant. She has not lodged any complaint regarding demand of dowry etc. As per the reply filed on behalf of the respondent, the applicant has filed a civil suit, which is pending at Fatehgarh Sahib. She has filed a petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. at Fategarh Sahib as well as a complaint TA No.601 of 2011 2 under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, which are pending at Fatehgarh Sahib. Apart from this, the daughter of the applicant is studying at Sanghol, District Fatehgarh Sahib. The averment of the applicant that the brother of the respondent is a lawyer at Fatehgarh Sahib, has no force as it has not been pointed out as to how the brother of the respondent can influence the administration of justice, nor any instance of any attempt on his part to influence the court, has been cited. Mere presumption or apprehension is not sufficient for a case to be transferred. A transfer should not readily be granted for any fancied notion of a litigant. The yardstick is “in the interest of justice”. The applicants should repose confidence in judicial process. The apprehension of the applicant is baseless and deserves to be rejected. Moreover, the distance between Fatehgarh Sahib and Mohali is merely 35 Kms. No sufficient ground is made out to transfer the case. In view of the above, the present application is dismissed. However, the respondent is directed to pay the travelling expenses to the applicant, which is quantified at `15,00/- per visit, only in the petition titled as ‘Narinder Singh Mangat vs. Harjinder Kaur’, filed by the respondent/husband under Section 11 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, (for short `the Act’) pending in court of learned Additional District Judge, Fatehgarh Sahib.
4.01.2012 (JITENDRA CHAUHAN) gsv JUDGE
http://indiankanoon.org/doc/198803983/
ajay sethi
(Expert) 02 April 2012
PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURTBefore:-M.M. KUMAR, J.Civil Misc. No. 9034-CII of 2003/ Decided on 30.5.2003Mrs. Navneet KaurPetitioner VersusCaptain A.P.S. Sandhu RespondentFor the Petitioner: Mr. Rajiv Kataria, Advocate.For the Respondent: Mr. M.S. Gulani, Advocate.
Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Section 24 —Transfer of case — Although for theTransfer of matrimonial case the convenience of the wife has to be seen,butWhere once the case has progressed to the stage of arguments or nearThe stage of arguments, then nothing remains to be done -- Held,Application for the transfer rejected. (Para 3)Cases referred:--
1. Neelam Kanwar v. Devinder Singh Kanwar, 2000 (4) All Instant Judgment 129[Para 3]2. Sumita Singh v. Kumar Sanjay, AIR 2002 SC 396 [Para3]
