Headnotes
The husband had filed a divorce petition before the Family Court at Hisar; the wife, living with her widowed mother and the couple's minor son at Sonepat and without independent income, sought transfer of the proceedings to Sonepat. The husband opposed, offering to bear her travel costs for hearings at Hisar instead.
Full Judgment Text
FACTS:
The husband filed a divorce petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 before the Family Court at Hisar. The couple, married in 2013, have a minor son born in 2015. The wife, residing with her widowed mother and the child at Sonepat, sought transfer of the proceedings to the Family Court at Sonepat, citing her lack of independent income, her dependence on her widowed mother, and her sole responsibility for the child's day-to-day care.
The husband opposed the transfer, offering instead to bear the wife's travelling expenses for hearings at Hisar.
COURT'S ANALYSIS:
Justice Harkesh Manuja held that an offer by the husband to bear travelling expenses does not, in every case, defeat a wife's prayer for transfer of matrimonial proceedings. The Court emphasised that such requests must be examined case-by-case, giving substantial weight to the convenience of female litigants.
The Bench took into account the wife's specific circumstances — her lack of independent income, her dependence on her widowed mother, and her sole responsibility for the couple's minor son — in concluding that continuing the litigation at Hisar would cause her genuine hardship that a mere offer to cover travel costs would not adequately address.
HOLDING:
The Punjab & Haryana High Court allowed the transfer petition and directed that the divorce proceedings be transferred from the Family Court at Hisar to the Family Court at Sonepat.
Source: LiveLaw, "Husband's Offer To Bear Travel Expenses Can't Automatically Defeat Wife's Transfer Plea: P&H High Court," September 9, 2026.
The husband filed a divorce petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 before the Family Court at Hisar. The couple, married in 2013, have a minor son born in 2015. The wife, residing with her widowed mother and the child at Sonepat, sought transfer of the proceedings to the Family Court at Sonepat, citing her lack of independent income, her dependence on her widowed mother, and her sole responsibility for the child's day-to-day care.
The husband opposed the transfer, offering instead to bear the wife's travelling expenses for hearings at Hisar.
COURT'S ANALYSIS:
Justice Harkesh Manuja held that an offer by the husband to bear travelling expenses does not, in every case, defeat a wife's prayer for transfer of matrimonial proceedings. The Court emphasised that such requests must be examined case-by-case, giving substantial weight to the convenience of female litigants.
The Bench took into account the wife's specific circumstances — her lack of independent income, her dependence on her widowed mother, and her sole responsibility for the couple's minor son — in concluding that continuing the litigation at Hisar would cause her genuine hardship that a mere offer to cover travel costs would not adequately address.
HOLDING:
The Punjab & Haryana High Court allowed the transfer petition and directed that the divorce proceedings be transferred from the Family Court at Hisar to the Family Court at Sonepat.
Source: LiveLaw, "Husband's Offer To Bear Travel Expenses Can't Automatically Defeat Wife's Transfer Plea: P&H High Court," September 9, 2026.
Cases Cited & References
- 1. 2026 LiveLaw (PH) 322