ORDER :

Yogendra Kumar Purohit, J. - The petitioner-wife has filed the instant civil transfer application seeking transfer of Case No. 44/2022 " Abhishek Choudhary v. Smt. Shipra Lamba " preferred by the respondent-husband under section 13 (1) (A) of the HINDU MARRIAGE ACT pending in the Court of Additional District Judge, Nathdwara, District Rajsamand to the Family Court No.1, Jaipur.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the marriage between the petitioner-wife and respondent-husband was solemnized on 08.02.2015 at Jaipur as per the Hindu rites & Customs and out of the wedlock, one male child was born who is residing with the petitioner. Since the petitioner-wife was harassed and treated with cruelty in connection with demand of dowry, therefore, she lodged an FIR No.294/2021 at Mahila Police Station Jaipur (North) under Sections 498A, 406, 377, 420, 312, 354 (gha), 342 and 120B IPC against the petitioner and his family members. In connection with said FIR, the respondent-husband has preferred S.B.Criminal Misc. Petition No.3722/22 " Kailash v. State " before Rajasthan High Court at Jaipur Bench which is pending. The petitioner-wife has also filed case bearing No.142/2021 " Smt. Shipra Choudhary v. Abhishek Choudhary & Ors." under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act before the ACMM No.9, Jaipur Metro, which is pending consideration. However, with a view to harass and humiliate the petitioner, the respondent-husband has moved application under section 13 (A) (1) of the HINDU MARRIAGE ACT before the Additional District Judge, Nathdwara, District Rajsamand seeking dissolution of marriage.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the petitioner is a young lady and is residing alongwith minor child at her parental home at Jaipur. The distance between Jaipur to Nathdwara, District Rajsamand is approximately 354 kilometers. Therefore, it is very difficult for the petitioner to travel from Jaipur to Nathdwara, District Rajsamand along with her minor child and defend the case instituted by the respondent husband.

5. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that since the cases filed by the parties as aforesaid are pending at Jaipur, in the interest of justice, the case filed by the respondent-husband pending before Additional District Judge, Nathdwara, District Rajsamand deserves to be transferred to Family Court No.1, Jaipur.

6. On the contrary, learned counsel appearing for the respondent-husband vehemently opposed the transfer of the case and prayed for rejection of the transfer application.

7. It is settled law that while considering transfer of case in matrimonial proceedings instituted by the husband, the convenience of the wife is to be looked into. In this regard, recently, Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the matter of N.C.V. Aishwarya v. A.S.Saravana Karthik Sha, (Civil Appeal No.4894/2022 arising out of SLP (C) No.16465/2021) decided on 18.7.2022, while considering transfer of matrimonial case under section 24 CPC, has observed as under:-

"The cardinal principle for exercise of power under section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure is that the ends of justice should demand the transfer of the suit, appeal or other proceeding. In matrimonial matters, wherever Courts are called upon to consider the plea of transfer, the Courts have to take into consideration the economic soundness of both the parties, the social strata of the spouses and their behavioural pattern, their standard of life prior to the marriage and subsequent thereto and the circumstances of b