1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION MISC.CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 160 OF 2009 Mrs. Deepali Sumit Deore ... Applicant Vs. Mr. Sumit Abhang Deore ... Respondent Mr. Rahul More, i/b. Mr.Uday Warunjikar, Advocate, for the applicant. Mr.R.K.Mendadkar,Advocate, for the respondents. CORAM: J.H.BHATIA, J. DATE : 23rd April, 2010. P.C. 1. The learned Counsel for the applicant seeks adjournment, but the Counsel for the respondent has strong objection on the ground that the applicant has already taken stay from this Court. Besides this, the learned Counsel for the respondent points out that the present applicant-wife had previously filed MCA No.39/2008 for transfer of the Marriage Petition filed by the respondent in the Court of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Vasai to the Family Court,Bandra. That application was rejected by this Court on 10.6.2008. This is a second application for transfer. 2 2. According to the learned Counsel for the applicant, there is a change in circumstance because after rejection of earlier transfer application, the applicant-wife has filed a petition for restitution of conjugal rights in the Family Court at Bandra. It appears that the husband had filed Marriage petition for divorce at Vasai in November, 2007, while the wife filed the petition for restitution of conjugal rights in September, 2009 and that too after her transfer application was rejected. Merely because the wife has field a petition for restitution of conjugal rights later on, it cannot be a change in circumstance. Besides this, it needs to be noted that Vasai is hardly 20 – 25 kms. from Bandra and they are well connected by the local trains of Western Railways. Ladies from Vasai-Virar commute for their jobs to Mumbai City everyday. It cannot be said that the applicant-wife cannot travel a distance of 20 – 25 kms. to attend the proceedings before the Vasai Court. Therefore, the Application stands rejected. Stay stands vacated. (J.H.BHATIA,J.)