1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION MISCELLANEOUS CIVIL APPLICATION NO.97 OF 2008 Mrs.Poonam Nilesh Bhintade : Petitioner. Versus Mr.Nilesh Balasaheb Bhintade : Respondent. Ms.Gauri Jadhav for the Petitioner. None for the Respondent, though served. CORAM : R.M.SAVANT, J. DATED : MARCH 05, 2009 P.C. 1. By the above Misc. Civil Application, the Petitioner seeks transfer of MJ. Petition No.A877 of 2008 filed by the Respondent under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act from the Family Court, Bandra, Mumbai to the Family Court, Pune. 2. The Petitioner is the wife and the Respondent is the husband. The marriage between the Petitioner and the Respondent took place on 8/12/2006 at Pune. It is the case of the Petitioner that 2 on account of the harassment and the ill-treatment meted out to her, she had to leave the matrimonial home and start residing with her mother. In February 2008, the Petitioner filed Hindu Marriage Petition No.141 of 2008 under Section 13(1)(i)(a) of the Hindu Marriage Act before the Family Court at Pune for divorce. The Petitioner has also filed an application for interim alimony and maintenance. The Respondent has filed MJ. Petition No.A877 of 2008 before the Family Court at Bandra, Mumbai for restitution of conjugal rights. The said Petition is filed on 4/4/2008. The Petitioner is seeking the transfer of the said Petition by the instant application. 3. It is the case of the Petitioner that the Petition filed by her is prior in point of time. It is the further case of the Petitioner that she has no source of income and she is living at the mercy of her mother and it is the mother who has to bear the legal expenses as well as the travelling expenses of the Petitioner when she has to attend the Family Court, Bandra, Mumbai whenever the the Petition filed by the Respondent is on board. It is further the case of the Petitioner that the Respondent is financially well-off and he can easily bear the 3 expenses of travelling. 4. None appears for the Respondent though served. 5. It is well settled by a catena of judgments of the Apex Court that the convenience of the wife in such matters is of primary importance. 6. Considering the fact that the Petition filed by the Petitioner above named in the Family Court, Pune is prior in point of time and also considering the fact that the Petitioner has financial constraints for attending the Court at Bandra, Mumbai, in my view, the interest of justice would be served, if the MJ Petition No.A877 of 2008 is transferred from the Family Court, Bandra, Mumbai to the Family Court, Pune and both the Petitions are heard together to avoid a conflict of decisions. 4 7. The above Miscellaneous Civil Application is therefore required to be allowed and is accordingly allowed in terms of prayer clause (a). 8. The Miscellaneous Civil Application is accordingly disposed of. [R.M.SAVANT, J]