1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION MISC. CIVIL APPLICATION NO.114 OF 2008 Smt.Deepa Girish Bora : Petitioner. Versus Girish Jawaharlal Bora : Respondent. Shri Rajesh S Datar for the Petitioner. Shri T S Ingale for the Respondent. CORAM : R.M.SAVANT, J. DATED : FEBRUARY 25, 2009 P.C. 1. By the above Civil Application, the Petitioner seeks transfer of Hindu Marriage Petition No.52 of 2008 filed by the Respondent from the Court of the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Ichalkaranji to the Court of the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Ahmednagar to be heard along with Hindu Marriage Petition No.287 of 2008 filed by the Petitioner for restitution of conjugal rights. 2. The marriage between the Petitioner and the Respondent 2 took place on 24th April 2003. Out of the said wedlock a daughter was born who is presently about 5 years old. The Petitioner and the Respondent initially lived at Surat and thereafter shifted to Ichalkaranji. It is the case of the Petitioner that on account of the harassment and cruelty meted out to the Petitioner by the Respondent and his parents, the Petitioner was forced to leave her matrimonial home and went to reside with her parents at Ahmednagar in December 2006. 3. The Respondent filed Hindu Marriage Petition No.52 of 2008 in the Court of the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Ichalkaranji seeking divorce. In the said Hindu Marriage Petition, summons were issued. Thereafter it appears that the Petitioner filed Hindu Marriage Petition No.287 of 2008 in the Court of the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division, Ahmednagar seeking restitution of conjugal rights. 4. As mentioned herein above, the instant Misc. Civil Application has been filed for transfer of the said Hindu Marriage 3 Petition No.52 of 2008 filed by the Respondent. It is the case of the Petitioner that it is highly inconvenient for her to travel to Ichalkaranji from Ahmednagar where she is residing with her parents. The distance between Ahmednagar and Ichalkaranji being about 400 kms. It is further the case of the Petitioner that since her daughter is five years old, she has necessarily to accompany the Petitioner and, therefore, it becomes inconvenient for the Petitioner to travel to Ichalkaranji from Ahmednagar on the dates when the Hindu Marriage Petition No.52 of 2008 is fixed for hearing. It is further the case of the Petitioner that she has no financial wherewithal as she is a house wife and she is dependant upon her parents who are also aged and sick. 5. On the other hand, it is the case of the Respondent that the Hindu Marriage Petition filed by him is earlier in point of time and need not be transferred to Ahmednagar as the Petition filed by the Applicant above named is only as and by way of counter-blast to the Petition filed by the Respondent. It is further the case of the Respondent that the Petitioner has been travelling to various places to attend marriages etc and, therefore, the alleged inconvenience is 4 only an excuse of the Petitioner to get the said Hindu Marriage Petition No.52 of 2008 transferred. It is further the case of the Respondent that the witnesses who would be examined by him are from Ichalkaranji. It is lastly contended on behalf of the Respondent that he is ready to bear the travelling as well as staying expenses of the Petitioner at Ichalkaranji. 6. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. It is well settled by the judgments of the Apex Court that the convenience of the wife is a primary consideration in such matters. A useful reference could be made to the judgments of the Apex court reported in 2002 AIR (SC) 396 in the case of Sumita Singh versus Kumar Sanjay and in 2009 (9) SCC 271 in the case of Seema versus Rakesh Kumar. 7. In the instant case, admittedly the distance between Ichalkaranji and Ahmednagar is about 400 kms. The Petitioner is a house wife, who has no source of income and has also therefore financial constraints. Another aspect that is to be considered is that the Petitioner wife has filed Hindu Marriage Petition for restitution of 5 conjugal rights for which the Respondent has to attend the Court at Ahmednagar. Therefore, even to avoid conflict of decisions, it is necessary to transfer the Hindu Marriage Petition No.52 of 2008 to the Court of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Ahmednagar. No doubt, the Respondent has voluntarily made a statement that he is ready to bear the travelling and staying expenses of the Petitioner at Ichalkaranji, however, the distance between Ichalkaranji and Ahmednagar is about 400 kms and therefore it is not possible to undertake the said journey in one day for such a distance and, therefore, the said statement of the Respondent would hardly be a solace to the Petitioner. 8. In so far as the case of the Respondent that all the witnesses, who will be examined in the Hindu Marriage Petition No.52 of 2008, are from Ichalkaranji, in my view, that cannot be a ground on which transfer of the Petition filed by the Respondent can be refused. The presence of the witnesses can certainly be secured by necessary convenience and if required by getting the summons issued by the Court. In my view, the inconvenience that will be experienced by the Petitioner and her daughter who is five years old far out weigh the 6 inconvenience if any that would be experienced by the Respondent in attending the Court at Ahmednagar. In that view of the matter, the above Misc. Civil Application is required to be allowed and is accordingly allowed in terms of prayer clause (a). Resultantly, the Hindu Marriage Petition No.52 of 2008 and Hindu Marriage petition No.287 of 2008 are directed to be tried and disposed of together within one year from date. [R.M.SAVANT, J]