Jitendra Chauhan, J. - (1.) NONE has put in appearance on behalf of the Respondent despite service. Accordingly, the Respondent is proceeded against ex parte.
(2.) THE present application has been preferred by the Applicant -wife, under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, praying for the transfer of the petition titled as 'Vikas Vs. Reena', filed by the respondent under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short 'the Act'), from the Court of learned District Judge, Kurukshetra, to the Court of competent jurisdiction at Karnal. Learned counsel for the applicant contends that after having been ousted from the matrimonial home, the applicant is residing at Karnal, at the mercy of her parents and the purpose of filing the petition under Section 13 of the Act is only to harass the applicant. She does not have any means to travel to Kurukshetra and defend her case. There is no male member in the family who can accompany her.
(3.) HON 'ble the Supreme Court in Neelam Kanwar vs Devinder Singh Kanwar, 2001 (1) M.L.J. 509 (SC), has observed as under: - We are mindful of the fact that the petitioner is a lady and first respondent is a male, and, therefore, for convenience of wife, a transfer to the place where the lady is residing, would be preferred by this Court unless, it is shown that there are special reason not to do so. No special reason is shown.;