IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION MISCELLANEOUS CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 103 OF 2007 DR.(SMT.) MAYURA SACHIN KANADE ..APPLICANT V/S SACHIN ARUN KANADE ..RESPONDENT MR. NITIN DESHPANDE, ADVOCATE, FOR THE APPLICANT. MR. M.D. ANGAL, ADVOCATE I/BY MRS. RUKMINI MEHER, FOR THE RESPONDENT. CORAM: J.H. BHATIA, J. CORAM: J.H. BHATIA, J. CORAM: J.H. BHATIA, J. DATE : 1ST APRIL, 2008. DATE : 1ST APRIL, 2008. DATE : 1ST APRIL, 2008. P.C. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Applicant is the wife of the Respondent. They were married on 27-2-2007 at Chandrapur. After the marriage she went to live with her husband. The Respondent - husband filed Marriage Petition No. 420 of 2007 on 12th September 2007 under section 12(1)(b) of the Hindu Marriage Act for annulment of the marriage on several grounds and one of the ground was that Applicant- Wife is schizophrenic. The Petition was filed before the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Pune. According to the applicant, she was compelled to leave the house of her : 2 : husband and presently she is living with her parents at Chandrapur. According to her the ground for annulment of the marriage is totally false and shocking. She is MBBS - DGO and she is medical practitioner. Anyhow, according to her she being a young lady, it is very difficult and inconvenient for her to travel from Chandrapur to Pune on every date when the matter is fixed for hearing. Therefore, by this application she seeks transfer of the Marriage Petition from the Court of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Pune, to the court of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Chandrapur. 2. The Application is opposed by the Respondent. Learned counsel for the Respondent contended that it is very difficult for the Respondent to attend the court at Chandrapur because he is an Engineer and doing the job of Marketing. According to him, the Respondent is ready and willing to pay the travelling expenses to the applicant as well as her escort. Learned counsel Mr. Deshpande for the Applicant makes a statement that this is not acceptable to the Applicant taking into consideration her age and long distance between Pune and Chandrapur. 3. Learned counsel for the Applicant, in support of his contention that in such Matrimonial proceeding the : 3 : convenience of wife must be looked into, relied upon Sumita Singh v/s Kumar Sanjay & Anr. reported in AIR 2002 Supreme Court 396. In that case, the wife was working at Delhi and husband had filed Marriage Petition in Ara where he was residing. The distance between the two places was about 1100 kilometres. Their Lordships held that it was inconvnient for the young lady to travel from Gurgaon to Ara and therefore the Marriage Petition was directed to be transferred from Ara to Delhi. This Authority is aptly applicable to the facts of the present case. The Applicant is a young lady aged about 25 years or so. The distance between Chandrapur and Pune may be around 900 to 1000 kilometres and the two stations are not directly connected even by train. If it is inconvenient for the husband to attend at Chandrapur because of nature of his occupation, it is also inconvenient for the wife, as she is the Medical Practitioner and a young lady aged about 25 years. From this it is clear that if the Marraige Petition is heard by the Civil Judge, Senior Division, Pune, it will be very inconvenient for the Applicant and if it is transferred to Chandrapur it will also be inconvenient to the husband. From this it will be clear that one of : 4 : the party will have to face inconvenience. If it is so, the inconvenience likely to be caused to the wife should be given more importance. 3. Therefore the Application is allowed. The Marriage Petition No. 420 of 2007 is hereby transferred from the file of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Pune, to the file of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Chandrapur. (J. H. BHATIA, J) (J. H. BHATIA, J) (J. H. BHATIA, J)