Saurabh Malik
Chandigarh, August 19
In a major relief for husbands and their families forced to travel out of station for proceedings related to matrimonial disputes before different courts, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has ruled that all matters filed by the wives in another city would be heard once a month to prevent appearances on multiple days.
For instance, if a husband resides in Chandigarh is facing cases filed by his wife in different courts in Amritsar, he would now have to travel there once a month.
Justice Arvind Singh Sangwan directed the High Court Registrar-General to circulate the directions among all family and other courts and illaqua magistrates dealing with different matrimonial cases in Punjab, Haryana and Chandigarh.
The Registrar-General has been asked to make it clear to the courts that they would in future accommodate the husbands and their families “with one date in all matrimonial cases in a calendar month, when the cases are transferred to a court as requested by the wife”. With this, Justice Sangwan has made it clear that a husband would have to travel only once a month for cases against him in another city.
The direction by Justice Sangwan came in a case where the wife was seeking the transfer of a matrimonial dispute from one city to another, on the ground that she was staying currently at her parental home 140 km away from the city where the matter was being heard. The petitioner claimed she could not, as such, properly defend the matter.
Appearing in person, the respondent-husband opposed the prayer on the ground that he was already appearing in other cases in the city his wife was presently staying. But he was also facing financial hardships as he had to attend the cases on multiple dates in a month.
Justice Sangwan asserted it was well-settled that while considering a matrimonial dispute transfer at the wife’s instance, the court was to consider her family condition, the minor child’s custody, her economic condition and physical health. The husband’s earning capacity was also to be looked into.
But most important was the wife’s convenience. The court was to see “if she could not travel alone without the assistance of a male member from her family, besides connectivity of the place to and fro from her place of residence, as well as bearing of the litigation charges and travelling expenses”.
“However, while balancing the hardships of the respondent-husband, who has to appear in multiple litigations on different dates, it is appropriate to direct the family court as well as the courts/illaqua magistrates, which are seized of the FIR case and the proceedings under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, to accommodate him with a single date so that his appearance in all cases is not more than once in one calendar month as and when all matrimonial cases are so adjourned,” Justice Sangwan asserted.
