In transfer petitions for matrimonial proceedings, the convenience of the parties and the jurisdictional issues must be carefully considered before allowing a transfer.

1. The petitioner/wife has filed the present Tr.C.M.P. praying for an issuance of an order by this Court to withdraw the H.M.O.P.No.35 of 2008 pending on the file of Fast Track Court at Ponneri and to transfer the same to the II Additional Family Court, Chennai.

2. The petitioner/wifes marriage has taken place on 21.04.1994 as per Hindu Rites and Custom. At the time of her marriage, the respondent/husband has been serving in Indian Army as Nayak. The petitioner/wife is now in employment as Junior Engineer in the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board. The respondent/husband after his stint with the Indian Army is now serving as a Security Officer in a private company. As a result of the wedlock, the petitioner has two issues through the respondent/husband. The petitioner/wifes children are studying in 8th standard and 4th standard respectively.

3. The respondent/husband has filed H.M.O.P.No.35 of 2008 praying for a decree of divorce against the petitioner/wife before the Sub Court, Ponneri.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner/wife urges before this Court that the petitioner/wife has never lived with the jurisdiction of the Sub Court, Ponneri and that the respondent/husband has given false address as if she lived with him at Thiruvottiyur and that the petitioner/wife is depending solely on her aged parents and she has to bring her aged parents to accompany her to attend a matrimonial case at Ponneri and she has got the responsibility to arrange for some one to bring her children from school and that the distance from Chennai to Ponneri and the conveyance is also a tedious one and therefore, prays for transferring H.M.O.P.No.35 of 2008 to the file of II Additional Family Court, Chennai.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner/wife brings it to the notice of this Court that on 17.09.2007 counter has been filed in H.M.O.P.No.35 of 2008 before the Sub Court, Ponneri and immediately the said case has been transferred to Fast Track Court at Ponneri and that the very transfer of the case for trial before the Fast Track Court without conducting any counseling for union is a vitiated one and that the petitioner/wife has filed maintenance case, M.C.No.466 of 2008 now pending on the file of II Additional Family Court at Chennai and therefore, it is equitable for this Court to order the transfer CMP in the interest of justice.

6. Contending contra, the learned counsel for the respondent/ husband submits that initially the petitioner/wife was living at Ramapuram with him and subsequently she has shifted her residence to Porur and now in the transfer CMP, she has given the address at New Washermanpet, Chennai-81 and since the petitioner/wife changes her residential address, the respondent/husband is not in a position to know her address and therefore, he has filed the HMOP proceedings at Ponneri and further that the petitioner/wife is employed as Junior Engineer in Tamil Nadu Electricity Board and that the petitioner/wife goes to office daily at 8o clock in the morning and she returns only during the evening at 8.00 p.m. and before the Fast Track Court, Ponneri, the petitioner/wife need not appear for every hearing of the case unlike that of the Family Court and H.M.O.P.No.35 of 2008 is ripe for trial at the Fast Track Court, Ponneri and even if any conciliation is to be done, the same can be done at the Fast Track Court at Ponneri and therefore, prays for dismissal of the transfer CMP.

7. Even though the H.M.O.P.No.35 of 2008 has been transferred to the file of Fast Track Court, Ponneri, till this date the same has not been taken up for trial and disposed of. However, the learned counsel for the petitioner/wife contends that the convenience of the wife has to be taken into account by a Court of law while dealing with the transfer petition and to lend support to his contention he relies on the decision Harpreet Kaur V. Rajwant Singh I (2002) DMC 17 wherein it is inter alia observed that transfer of case to place where lady is r