1 42.10-mca IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY. APPELLATE JURISDICTION. MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 42 OF 2010 Mrs.Prachi Rajesh Mehtar and another. ... Applicants. V/s. Mr.Rajesh R. Mehtar. ... Respondent. S.V.Sadavarte for the appellants. B.K.Raje for the respondent. CORAM: R.M.BORDE, J. DATED : 14th September 2011. P.C. : Heard. Rule. With consent of parties, petition is taken up for final disposal at the admission stage. 2. This is an application by the wife and her minor daughter aged 4½ years seeking transfer of proceeding being Civil Application No.116/2009, pending on the file of learned District Judge, Raigad- Alibag, to the Family Court, Bandra for being disposed of along with M.J.Petition No.E-500/2009. It is stated in the application that the petitioner No.1 is legally wedded wife of the respondent and their marriage took place on 11th May 2005. The petitioner No.2 is a girl 2 42.10-mca child born from the wedlock between the petitioner No.1 and the respondent. It is stated that due to marital discord, the petitioner-wife and respondent-husband are staying separately. The petitioner had to take shelter of her family members on maternal side and is presently staying at Bandra, Mumbai whereas the husband is staying at Alibag. Respondent husband has presented application seeking custody of the child being Civil Application No.116/2009 and is pending before the District Judge, Raigad-Alibag. It need not be reiterated that custody of the child, who is girl child below five years of age, shall be generally with mother, and ordinarily, cannot be asked by the husband. Petitioner has also presented proceeding under section 125 of Cr.P.C. claiming maintenance amount in the Family Court at Bandra and the same is registered as M.J.Petition NoE-500/2009. It is contention of the petitioner that she is a helpless lady staying with her family members from maternal side. She is unemployed and is at mercy of her brother. It is further contended by the petitioner that she will not be able to prosecute the litigation presented by the respondent-husband in the District Court Raigad-Alibag. In this view of the matter, it is requested that the Petition presented in the Court of District Judge, Raigad be transferred to the Family Court, Bandra. 3. This application is opposed by the respondent- husband contending that the transfer application is presented merely to exert pressure on the husband for agreeing to the proposal for securing divorce by mutual consent. Reliance is placed on the legal notice issued by the petitioner- wife; wherein it is suggested that the husband may agree for divorce by mutual consent. Merely because a notice is transmitted suggesting a via-media for settling the matrimonial dispute 3 42.10-mca does not mean that the instant application is presented only to exert pressure on the husband for giving consent to the proposal extended by the petitioner- wife. Even otherwise, the proceeding which is presented in the Court of District Judge, Raigad shall be transferred to the Court at Mumbai where the petitioner- wife resides. It will be, therefore, in the fitness of the thing to direct transfer of matrimonial proceeding bearing No.116/2010 pending on the file of District Judge, Raigad- Alibag to the Family Court at Bandra for final disposal in accordance with law, and it is accordingly ordered. Rule is made absolute in terms of this order. In the facts and circumstances of the case, there is no order as to costs. 4. Both parties shall appear before the Family Court at Bandra on 10th October 2011 and, as such, no separate notice requiring their appearance before the Family Court at Bandra would be necessary. (R.M.BORDE, J.)