: 1 : IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION MISCELLANEOUS CIVIL APPLICATION NO.66 OF 2009 Bharati Dharmesh Vora .. Applicant V/s. Dharmesh Mulchand Vora .. Respondent Ms. Trupti P. Satghil i/b. M/s. Bhuta & Associates for the Applicant. Mr. D.M. Vora, Respondent, present in person. CORAM : SMT. NISHITA MHATRE, J. DATED : 5 TH JANUARY, 2010. P.C.: 1. The Miscellaneous Civil Application has been filed for transferring the proceedings pending in the District Court, Sangli to the Family Court, Mumbai at Bandra. These proceedings being Petition No.MR/BB/5589 of 2008 are in respect of an application for restitution of conjugal rights filed by respondent-husband against the applicant- wife. The applicant has filed a Divorce Petition in October, 2008, which is pending before the Family Court, Mumbai at Bandra. It is in these circumstances that the applicant has sought a transfer of the proceedings pending in the District Court, Sangli to the Family Court, Mumbai. : 2 : 2. The applicant has contended that it is difficult for her to travel to Sangli as she would be required to be accompanied by some other person while travelling to Sangli as she is residing in Mumbai with her parents. It is contended that the costs of travelling to Sangli of two persons would be exorbitant and that her brother, who is the sole earning member of the family, can ill-afford to pay for the same. 3. Heard the learned Counsel for the applicant and the respondent who appears in person. 4. The respondent has submitted that he has tried to resolve the dispute in order to ensure that the applicant returns to Sangli and lives with him. However, according to the respondent, his attempts have failed and, therefore, he has filed an application for restitution of conjugal rights. He submits that the statements made in the present application about his wealth and income are incorrect and denies the same. : 3 : 5. In my opinion, since there are proceedings pending in the Family Court, Mumbai, it would be appropriate to have the Petition for restitution of conjugal rights decided by the same Court. This would avoid the possibility of two contrary judgments in the event the two proceedings are decided by two different Judges. The Petition for divorce has been filed in October, 2008, whereas the application for restitution of conjugal rights has been filed in January, 2009. The applicant has made out a case for transfer of that application to the Family Court, Mumbai. 6. Accordingly, the Miscellaneous Civil Application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a). .......