http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2  

CASE NO.: Transfer Case (crl.)  311 of 2003

PETITIONER: Arun Aggarwal

RESPONDENT: Reetam Aggarwal

DATE OF JUDGMENT: 26/04/2004

BENCH: R.C. Lahoti & Ashok Bhan.

JUDGMENT: J U D G M E N T

O R D E R

With

Transfer Petition (Civil) Nos.   3-4  of 2004

Reetam Aggrawal Versus Arun Aggarwal

       This order shall dispose of Transfer Petition(Crl.) No. 311 of 2003  filed at the instance of Shri Arun Aggarwal (husband) seeking transfer of  case No. 183/11 of 2002  titled  Reetam Aggarwal vs. Arun Aggarwal  under Section 125 Cr.P.C., claiming maintenance, pending in the Court of  Magistrate \026I, Muzaffar Nagar, to a Court of competent jurisdiction at  Chandigarh  and Transfer Petition (Civil) Nos.  3-4 of 2004 at the instance of  Smt. Reetam Aggarwal  (wife)  for transfer of  the Divorce Petition No. 54  of 2001 titled Arun Aggrawal vs. Reetam Aggrawal under Section 13 of  the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955  filed by the husband in the Court of  Additional District Judge, Chandigarh and an allied  petition No. Nil/2003  titled Arun Aggawal Vs. Reetam Aggrawal under Sections 7 & 8 of the  Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 in the Court of Senior Sub-Judge,  Chandigarh to the Family Court at District Muzaffar Nagar, U.P..  

Marriage between the parties was solemnised on 20.1.1995 at  Chandigarh according to Hindu rites and customs. Prior to the marriage Smt.  Reetam Aggrawal did her graduation from Government College for Girls,  Sector 11, Chandigarh.   Thereafter, she did her Post Graduation from  Punjab University, Sector 14, Chandigarh.  During this period she stayed  with her sister Smt. Vibha Aggarwal at Chandigarh.   After marriage the  parties resided at House No. 76, Sector 16, Chandigarh. From this wed-lock  a female child was born on 23.9.1998.   

According to the husband, the wife deserted him on 24.1.1999 and in  spite of his efforts she did not agree to rejoin him at the matrimonial home.   Having failed in persuading his wife to come and reside with him at the  matrimonial home, he filed a divorce petition No. 54 of 2001 at Chandigarh.    He also filed an allied petition No. Nil/2003 for custody of his minor child.   As a counter blast, Smt. Reetam Aggrawal filed a petition under Section 125  Cr.P.C. for maintenance.

It has also been alleged that earlier Smt. Reetam Aggrawal filed  Transfer Petition ) No. 124 of 2002 in this Court seeking transfer of  matrimonial proceedings pending in the Court of Additional District Judge,  Chandigarh, Union Territory to Muzaffarnagar  in the State of Uttar Pradesh,  which was dismissed by this Court on 17.1.2003 on the ground that she was

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2  

residing at Chandigarh and was doing B.Ed. course in a college at  Chandigarh.

Smt. Reetam Aggrawal in reply affidavit has denied the allegations  made in the petition.   She has pleaded that she is the permanent resident of  Khatauli, District Muzaffarnagar, U.P.  Her parents are living at Khatauli.   As her prayer for transfer of the case pending at Chandigarh was rejected she  kept on living at Chandigarh; she was now teaching in an orphanage  (Gurukul) at Panchkula without any remuneration or allowance in any form  whatsoever,  she wants to return to Khatauli and live with her parents, as she  does not want to be burden on her parents any longer and was trying to get  some employment in Khatauli or near about.  It is asserted by her that her  earlier transfer petition was dismissed only on the ground that she was  undergoing the B.Ed. course at Chandigarh.  Now since she has completed  her studies she wants to return to Khatauli and live with her parents.   Allegation that she had deserted her husband has been denied.  According to  her she was turned out from her matrimonial home.   

Heard learned counsel for the parties.  

Dismissal of earlier Transfer Petition (C) No. 124 of 2002  filed by the  wife for transfer of matrimonial proceedings pending in the Court of  Additional District Judge, Chandigarh, Union Territory to Muzaffarnagar in  the State of Uttar Pradesh would have no bearing as the same was dismissed  on the ground that she was undergoing her B.Ed. course of study at  Chandigarh. She has completed her studies and  she is not gainfully  employed at Chandigarh.  Staying at Chandigarh only to  pursue the  matrimonial cases pending at Chandigarh may be expensive.  She intends to  shift to Muzaffarnagar.  It would be appropriate and in the interest of justice  to transfer both the above-mentioned cases to a Court of competent  jurisdiction at Muzaffarnagar, U.P..  

Accordingly, without going into the allegations and counter  allegations made by the parties and keeping in view the facts and  circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice transfer petitions filed  by the wife are allowed.  It is directed that the Divorce Petition No. 54 of  2001 titled Arun Aggrawal vs. Reetam Aggrawal under Section 13 of the  Hindu Marriage Act, 1955  filed by the husband in the Court of Additional  District Judge, Chandigarh and the allied  petition No. Nil/2003 titled Arun  Aggrawal vs. Reetam Aggrawal under Sections 7 & 8 of the Guardians and  Wards Act, 1890 in the Court of Senior Sub-Judge, Chandigarh shall stand  transferred to the Court of District & Sessions Judge, Muzaffarnagar, U.P.

The Courts at Chandigarh are directed to transfer the record of the  above-referred two cases to the Court of District & Sessions Judge,  Muzaffarnagar, U.P. who may on receipt of the record assign the above- referred two cases to the appropriate Court of competent jurisdiction.    Accordingly, the Transfer Petition (C) Nos. 3-4 of 2004 are allowed and  disposed of  in the above terms.   

In view of the above order passed by us in Transfer Petition (C) Nos.  3-4 of 2004 filed by Smt. Reetam Aggrawal, we do not find any merit in  Transfer Petition (Crl.). No. 311 of 2003 filed by Shri Arun Aggarwal and is  dismissed.  Nothing stated hereinabove be taken as expression of opinion on  the merits of pleas of either party sub-judice before the trial courts.  The  Court trying the petitions shall dispose of the petitions without being  influenced by any of the observation in this order.   No order as to costs.