JUDGMENT :

Ashokkumar C. Joshi, J.

1. Heard learned Advocate Mr. Keval H. Bhatt for the Applicant-Wife and learned Advocate Mr. Dipen Desai for the Opponent-Husband through video conference.

2. The Applicant-Wife (Original Opponent) has filed this Miscellaneous Civil Application under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 for transferring the Family Suit No. 20 of 2021 pending with the Family Court at Gandhinagar to the Family Court at Ahmedabad on the grounds mentioned in the Application.

3. The facts in nutshell are that the Applicant is a legally wedded wife of the present opponent. The marriage between the parties took place on 22.1.2013. It is stated in the memo of application that since the inception of marriage, the applicant was subjected to physical and mental atrocity at the hands of the opponent and her family members. The Applicant has filed Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 1156 of 2020 under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for getting maintenance of herself and a minor daughter before the learned Family Court at Ahmedabad. That the Applicant is living with the aged parents, younger brother and a minor daughter Prisha. The Applicant is living a miserable life and is now without any sufficient means to survive because the Opponent has deserted the Applicant without providing any sufficient means to survive and the Applicant is now constrained to live a miserable life since last three years. The Applicant has therefore approached this Hon'ble Court by way of filing this Application for transfer of Family Suit No. 20 of 2021 pending before the learned Principal Judge, Family Court at Gandhinagar to the learned Family Court at Ahmedabad on the grounds mentioned in the memo of Application.

4. Learned Advocate for the Applicant has heavily placed reliance upon the judgments passed by the coordinate bench as under:

(i) AIR 2002 SC 396-Sumita Singh v. Kumar Sanjay and anr.

(ii) Miscellaneous Civil Application No. 1245 of 2018 decided on 7.1.2019

(iii) Miscellaneous Civil Application No. 3061 of 2010 decided on 9.2.2011

(iv) Miscellaneous Civil Application No. 95 of 2008 decided on 18.7.2008

(v) Miscellaneous Civil Application No. 205 of 2015 decided on 9.3.2016

(vi) Miscellaneous Civil Application No. 2751 of 2013 decided on 5.2.2014

5. Learned Advocate for the Applicant-Wife has vehemently and fervently argued that in the present case the Applicant-Wife is facing hardships to attend the court at Gandhinagar from Ahmedabad and therefore the present Application is required to be transferred from Gandhinagar to Ahmedabad. Learned Advocate has further submitted that though the distance between Gandhinagar and Ahmedabad is 40 Kmts. but there is nobody to accompany the Applicant to travel from Ahmedabad to Gandhinagar. Moreover, the mother and father of the Applicant are not only aged but also have severe medical conditions and hence they cannot travel with the Applicant and her minor daughter. He has further submitted that the Applicant herself is diagnosed with deficiency in the body and often suffers fatigue and drowsiness. The minor daughter of the Applicant was also diagnosed with the Covid recently. He has placed reliance on the judgment passed by the Coordinate Bench [Coram: Mrs. Justice Bela M. Trivedi, J (at present Hon'ble Judge, Supreme Court of India)] where the Court has allowed the Application on the ground of distance from Bharuch to Baroda.

6. Per contra, learned Advocate Mr. Dipen Desai for the Respondent-Husband has heavily opposed this Application and stated that the distance between Ahmedabad and Gandhinagar is not much. Learned Advocate for the Applicant has submitted that as such there are no comparative hardships to the Applicant. He fairly submitted that the Respondent is ready to pay traveling allowances to the Applicant for her to and for journey.

7. Having heard the arguments advanced by the learned Advocates for both the sides, prima facie it appears that the distance between Ahmedab