1 MCA 37/2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD MISC.CIVIL APPLICATION NO.37 OF 2011 AARTI KUNAL MAHAJAN AND ANR VERSUS KUNAL VIJAY MAHAJAN AND ORS ... Advocate for Petitioner: Mr. Londhe Shashikant S Advocate for Respondent 1 : Mr.AA Nimbalkar, Adv. h/for Mr. VD Salunke. ***** CORAM : K.U.CHANDIWAL, J. DATE : 24th NOVEMBER, 2011. PER COURT : 1) Heard both sides. 2) Transfer of Hindu Marriage Petition from the file of learned Judge of the Family Court, Aurangabad to the court of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Hingoli, is urged. 3) The petition for transfer proceeds with several accusations of huge demand of dowry, gifts, harassment at the instance of respondent/husband etc. 2 MCA 37/2011 4) In para 5 of the petition, the applicant wife informs that she has been residing at the residence of her uncle at Hingoli. She gave birth to applicant no.2 – Soha on 24.6.2010 at Aurangabad. 5) It is pertinent, the parents of wife reside at Aurangabad, still she consciously desires to get the proceedings transferred to Hingoli on the premise to be staying with her real uncle. This is illusory, smells of extending tortures treatement to the respondent/husband, who has to come all along for prosecuting the proceedings from Nasik. Even, in the FIR lodged by wife, she has addressed the Police Officer to be residing at Aurangabad along with her uncle. 6) In the set of above situation, the request of transfer of the proceedings as sought by the petitioner wife cannot be entertained, it is accordingly rejected. Misc. Civil Application dismissed. However, if the applicant wife 3 MCA 37/2011 establishes, during the hearing of the proceedings before the learned Judge of the Family Court, Aurangabad, that she is traveling from Hingoli for attending the court proceedings at Aurangabad, in that eventuality, necessary to and fro charges including diet charges, shall be borne and paid by the respondent/husband, as per the details furnished by petitioner wife. (K.U.CHANDIWAL) JUDGE bdv/