The main legal point established in the judgment is the broad interpretation of the term 'suit' under the Code of Civil Procedure and the Family Courts Act, and the affirmation of the jurisdiction of the Civil Court to entertain proceedings under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

( 1 ) PARTIES were heard on the last date and today the matter is kept for dictation of the Judgment.

( 2 ) THIS application is filed by the applicant/wife invoking jurisdiction of this court under section 23 (3) read with Section 151 and Section 24 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as the said code ). The Applicant has prayed for transfer of Hindu Marriage Petition No. A-794 of 2003 filed by the Respondent pending in the Family court at Bandra, Mumbai to the court of Civil judge (S. D.), Patan, State of Gujrat. The case of the Applicant is that she is a resident of patan, Gujrat and the Court at Patan is also having jurisdiction to entertain and try the matrimonial Petition filed by the Respondent. It is not in dispute that the Applicant had filed a Petition for maintenance which was allowed by a Court at Patan. The case of the applicant is that she is residing at Patan along with her mother whose age is 77 years. Her mother is suffering from Asthama and hypertension. The case of the Applicant is that she is required to attend to her mother personally and therefore she is not in a position to move out of the house. Therefore, it is impossible for her to attend the Family Court at Mumbai.

( 3 ) THE application is strongly opposed by the Respondent by filing affidavit- in-reply. Apart from challenging the maintainability of this Application in this Court, it is submitted that there is no Family Court at patan and therefore special machinery which is available in the Family Court at Mumbai is not available in the Court of Civil Judge (S. D.) at Patan. The apprehension is expressed that the Applicant will harass the Respondent as and when he is required to attend the Court at Patan.

( 4 ) THE learned Counsel for the applicant relied upon the Judgments reported in AIR 1991 Allahabad 189 (Munna Lai and etc. Vs. State of U. P. and another); air 2000 Andhra Pradesh 394 (Mamta gupta Vs. Mukund Kumar Gupta) and another Judgment of Andhra Pradesh High court reported in (2003)8 ILD 652 (AP) (Smt. Vempati Sarada Vs. Vempati kaladhar ). Relying upon the rules framed under Family Courts Act, 1984 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act of 1984) and section 7 of the said Act of 1984, he submitted that the Petition for divorce in the Family Court will have to be treated as a suit and therefore the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 23 can be invoked by the Applicant.

( 5 ) THE learned Counsel appearing for the Respondent submitted that the power of this Court under Section 23 of the said code is restricted only to the suits and not to petitions in the Family Court. Secondly, he submitted that the Court of Civil Judge (S. D.), patan does not possess the necessary infrastructure which the Family Court under the said Act of 1894 possesses. Therefore, prejudice will be caused if order of transfer is passed.

( 6 ) IT will be necessary in this connection to refer to the Sections 22 to 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 which read thus :

"22. Power to transfer suits which may be instituted in more than one Court - where a suit may be instituted in any one of two or more Courts and is instituted in one of such Courts, any defendant, after notice to the other parties, may, at the earliest possible opportunity and in all cases where issues are settled at or before such settlement, apply to have the suit transferred to another Court, and the Court to which such application is made, after considering the objections of the other parties (if any), shall determine in which of the several Courts having jurisdiction the suit shall proceed. 23. To what court application lies - (1) where the several Courts having jurisdiction are subordinate to the same appellate Court, an application under section 22 shall be made to the Appellant court. (2) Where such Courts are subordinate to different Appellate Courts but to the same high Court, the application shall be made to the said High Court. (3) Where such Courts are subord