Important Point – While deciding application filed under Section 24 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, convenience of wife has to be considered by Court.

1. By this miscellaneous civil application filed under section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, the applicant wife seeks transfer of Hindu Marriage Petition No.A/80 of 2013 pending in the 3rd Family Court at Bandra to the Family Court at Nashik at Nashik Road.

2. The applicant was married to the respondent on 6th March, 2006 at Bhoiwada, Mumbai. It is the case of the applicant that in view of the ill-treatment given to the applicant by her husband and in-laws, the applicant started residing with her parents at Nashik. A male child is born out of the said wedlock between the applicant and the respondent.

3. It is the case of the applicant that the respondent has been working in a private company and earing a salary of approximately Rs.50,000/- per month and is also earning Rs.5.00 lacs per year from the agricultural land. The applicant is working as a Bus Conductor and is earning a meager salary. The parents of the applicant are retired. The applicant is not able to attend the proceedings at Mumbai along with her parents. Her son is five years old and has been studying in a school at Nashik.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the applicant invited my attention to the judgment of the Supreme Court in case of T. Gayatri Devi vs. Dr. Tallepaneni Sreekanath, 2013(6) Bom.C.R. 119 and in particular paragraphs 4 and 5 and would submit that the respondent husband, who has filed divorce proceedings against the applicant in the Family Court, Bandra cannot force the applicant wife to attend the said proceedings at the place convenient to the husband and cannot expect the applicant to travel from Nashik to Mumbai. Paragraphs 4 and 5 of the judgment of the Supreme Court read as under :-

“4. We find the approach of the High Court and the reasons assigned clearly unsustainable as the High Court appears to have lost sight of the fact that the respondent-husband on the one hand has filed a divorce proceeding against the appellant-wife and further expects the same to be tried at a place of his choice, which is Hyderabad. The High Court refused to transfer it to the place where the wife is working on the ground that the petitioner-wife is not an indigent lady and she is capable of contesting the suit by undertaking journey from Kakinada to Hyderabad. The learned Single Judge has completely overlooked the implication of this view as on the one hand the appellant-wife would be expected to contest the divorce proceeding to her detriment and at the same time would have to undertake the journey from Kakinada to Hyderabad which is bound to affect discharge of her professional duties where she is working as apart from the journey she would also have to seek leave which surely would affect her performance in the company further and put her job at risk. The import of the order clearly is that on the one hand the appellant-wife should live alone, maintain herself by living at her parents place and on the top of it give more attention to contest the divorce proceeding rather than looking to her job on which she is surviving in absence of any support from her husband who not only seeks a decree of divorce but also at convenience by choosing a place of his choice to secure a decree of divorce.

5. Considering the implication of the aforesaid situation and circumstance, the view taken by the High Court refusing to transfer the case is fit to be struck down as illegal, devoid of practical fallout and wisdom.”

5. Learned counsel for the respondent on the other hand submits that the applicant is working as a Bus Conductor and is travelling between Nashik and Dhule and thus the applicant can attend the proceedings in Mumbai also. She submits that merely because the applicant being a woman she cannot take advantage of her gender and cannot apply for transfer of the proceedings purely on that ground.

6. The respondent does not deny that her client is earning income of Rs.50,000/- per month as salary as well as earning Rs.5.00 lacs per year from the agricultu