1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION MISC.CIVIL APPLICATION NO.195 OF 2009 Mrs. Jahnvi Umesh Javdekar .... Applicant Vs. Umesh Anil Javdekar .... Respondent S/Shri H.M. Inamdar i/b M.S. Karnik for the Applicant. Shri D.S. Joshi for the Respondent. CORAM: R.C. CHAVAN, J. DATED: JULY 2, 2010 P.C: 1. This is an application by wife for transfer of P.A. No.388 of 2009 from the Family Court at Pune to the competent Court at Nasik where the applicant-wife is residing. She has also filed an application for maintenance before the competent Court at Nasik. Therefore, she seeks transfer of P.A. No.388 of 2009 from the Court at Pune to the Court at Nasik. 2. The respondent-husband has a very serious objection. He states that the transfer petition is filed mischievously in order to 2 harass the respondent after the respondent had filed a petition for restitution of conjugal rights in Pune. He states that the applicant had claimed that she was pursuing some study at Nagpur and, therefore, she could not be said to be staying at Nasik. Learned counsel for the applicant states that the applicant has completed her studies at Nagpur and is now staying at Nasik. Learned counsel for the respondent also places reliance on a judgment of the Supreme Court in Anindita Das v. Srijit Das, reported in 2006 (9) SCC 197. The Supreme Court had observed that at one stage the Supreme Court was showing leniency towards ladies but since it was found that large number of petitions are filed by women taking advantage of the leniency shown by the Court, it was clear that the leniency was being misused and therefore each petition has to be decided on its own merit. Bearing this in mind, I proceed to examine whether the applicant has filed an application for maintenance before the Civil Court at Nasik for which the respondent would be required to travel to Nasik to contest the said petition. Therefore, it is not that the respondent would not be required to travel to Nasik. Question is whether both the parties should find themselves on the road between 3 Nasik and Pune or rather the respondent himself should be going to Nasik. In view of this, it appears more convenient to order the husband to go to Nasik rather than asking both husband and wife to shuttle between Nasik to Pune. 3. Learned counsel for the respondent states that the respondent is ready to bear the expenses of the wife for travelling from Nasik to Pune. It is not the question of expenditure. It is also a question of time and energy lost in commuting particularly since the respondent cannot avoid going to Nasik where the wife has filed a petition for maintenance. The application is therefore allowed; the Marriage Petition bearing P.A. No.388 of 2009 is transferred from the Family Court at Pune to the Civil Court at Nasik. (R.C. CHAVAN, J.)