LALITA YADAV  Vs MAM RAJ YADAV -Judgment by Delhi High Court

$~47and 48
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ TR.P.(C.) 189/2023 and CM APPL. 63104/2023 (Stay)
LALITA YADAV ….. Petitioner
Through: Mr. Anunaya Mehta, Adv.

versus

MAM RAJ YADAV ….. Respondent
Through: Mr. Nishit Kush, Mr. Siddharth Sikri and Ms. Kirti Singh, Advs.

+ TR.P.(C.) 190/2023 and CM APPL. 63106/2023(Stay)
LALITA YADAV ….. Petitioner
Through: Mr. Anunaya Mehta, Adv.

versus

MAM RAJ YADAV ….. Respondent
Through: Through: Mr. Nishit Kush, Mr. Siddharth Sikri and Ms. Kirti Singh, Advs.
CORAM:
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE C.HARI SHANKAR
O R D E R (ORAL)
% 12.01.2024

TR.P.(C.) 189/2023 and TR.P.(C.) 190/2023

1. The petitioner and the respondent, in these transfer petitions, are wife and husband. They were married as per Hindu rites and customs on 15 May 2002.

2. Shorn of superfluities, it may straightway be noted that, owing to alleged fiction between the parties, the petitioner had to leave the matrimonial home. She, thereafter, filed HMA 575/2006 under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 seeking restitution of conjugal rights. That petition is presently pending at Tis Hazari Courts.

3. There are two other litigations between the parties. One is CA 329/2019, which was instituted by the petitioner against the respondent under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, which is pending before the District Courts at Dwarka. The second is HMA 2698/2022, instituted by the respondent against the petitioner seeking divorce, which is presently pending before the learned Additional Principal Judge, Family Courts, Tis Hazari.

4. The prayer of the petitioner, in this case, is that as she is staying alone and it is extremely difficult for her to travel the distance to Tis Hazari Courts to prosecute the HMA petitions and the divorce petition, which are pending between the parties, and as the petition under the Domestic Violence Act is already pending before Dwarka Courts, HMA 575/2006 and HMA 2698/2022 be transferred to the Dwarka Courts.

5. Mr. Kush, learned Counsel for the respondent, after some initial opposition, agreed to the transfer subject to two conditions. The first was that the proceedings would continue from the stage at which they were presently. The second was that a time bound schedule be fixed for HMA 575/2006 and HMA 2698/2022 to be completed.

6. Mr. Mehta, who appears for the petitioner, is agreeable to both conditions.

7. Accordingly, HMA 575/2006 and HMA 2698/2022 stand transferred to the competent Court in the Dwarka District Courts. The
Court is, however, directed to endeavour to conclude the proceedings and pass final orders thereon as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within eight months from today.

8. These petitions stand allowed to the aforesaid extent.

9. The Registry of the Tis Hazari Courts is directed to take expeditious steps to transmit the record of HMA 575/2006 and HMA 2698/2022 to the Dwarka Courts.

10. Needless to say, both the cases would be heard together.

CM APPL. 63104/2023 (Stay) and CM APPL. 63106/2023(Stay)

11. These applications do not survive for consideration and stand disposed of.

C.HARI SHANKAR, J
JANUARY 12, 2024
rb

Click here to check corrigendum, if any

TR.P.(C.) 189/2023 & cont. matter Page 3 of 3