TA/549/2026 of ANU PANNU Vs NAVEEN KUMAR on 10 September 2026

1. The app of petition bea Kumar”, filed (hereinafter to husband; from Sonipat to the C

2. Briefly sta was solemnize namely, Deven of matrimonial d under Section respondent-hus transfer thereof

3. Learned applicant-wife i

COURT OF PUNJAB AND HA Date of Decis

Versus AR

N'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARKE Bhupinder Ghai, Advocate fo Shamsher Singh Tomar, Adv Ajay Singh Kalsan, Advocate **** ANUJA, J. (ORAL) plicant-wife, by way of presen aring No. GW/7/2023, titled under Section 25 of Guar o be referred as “the Act”) a the Court of learned Prin Court of competent jurisdiction ating, the marriage between t ed on 11.11.2016. Out of Chhikara and Geetanjali Chh discord between the parties, 25 of the Act, came to be sband. Thereupon, the pr f came to be filed by the applic counsel for the applicant, i s residing at her parental ho TA-549-202 ARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

sion: SEPTEMBER 10, 2026

........Applicant

........Respondent ESH MANUJA or the applicant. vocate and e for the respondent.

nt application, seeks transfer “Anu Pannu vs. Naveen rdians and Wards Act, 1890 at the instance of respondent- ncipal Judge, Family Court, n at Karnal or Panipat. the applicant and respondent their wedlock, two children hikara were born. On account the above mentioned petition preferred at the instance of resent application seeking cant-wife. inter alia, contends that the ome at Karnal. Accordingly, a r n

- , t n t n f g e a prayer is made for transfer of the above mentioned petition filed at the instance of respondent-husband from Family Court, Sonipat to Family Court, Karnal.

4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent vehemently opposes the prayer made in the application on behalf of the applicant.

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 bearing No.MNT/125/367/2023 for grant of maintenance, a petition bearing No.CHI/119/2023 and an application bearing No.CRM-27-2026 are pending adjudication at District Courts, Karnal. Besides it, the applicant is also taking care of her minor daughter and it would be inconvenient for the applicant-wife to travel to Sonipat on each date of hearing.

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 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 bearing No.MNT/125/367/2023, a petition bearing No.CHI/119/2023 and an application bearing No.CRM-27-2026 are pending adjudication at Karnal, 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 25 of the Guardians and Wards, Act, 1890 i.e. GW/7/2023, titled “Anu Pannu vs. Naveen Kumar”, filed by the respondent-husband, stands transferred from the Court of learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Sonipat to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Karnal. The requisite record of the aforesaid case be sent by the learned Family Court, Sonipat to the Court concerned. Parties are directed to appear before the learned Family Court at Karnal on 22.09.2026. Learned trial Court is requested to fix all the cases on the same date.

9. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.

10.09.2026

(HARKESH MANUJA) Tejwinder

JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable Yes/No