ORDER

In both the above petitions, the petitioner wife is seeking transfer of cases filed by the respondent husband under Sections 9 and 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. In both these cases transfer is being sought on the same grounds, therefore, both the M.C.Cs are being decided by this common order.

2. Counsel for the petitioner contends that the marriage of the petitioner as well as respondent was solemnized on 28.1.2016. After the marriage, the petitioner was subjected to cruelty and accordingly the instances of cruelty gave birth to the litigations. The present petitioner filed an application under Section 125 of Code of Criminal Procedure before the Family Court, Jabalpur. Respondent/husband also filed an application under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 in the Family Court, Shahdol and also an application under Section 13 of the Act of 1955. The counsel contends that both the cases be directed to be transferred to Family Court, Jabalpur inasmuch as, the petitioner is living at Jabalpur along with her sister. There is no male member who can accompany the petitioner to Shahdol on the scheduled dates of hearing. It is further contended by the counsel for the petitioner that if the petitioner ensures her appearance at Family Court, Shahdol the same would cause inconvenience to the petitioner. It is thus contended by the counsel that taking into consideration the law laid down by the Apex Court in N.C.V. [2022 LiveLaw(SC) 627],

Chouhan v. Vishal Singh Chouhan [(2019) 13 SCC 660] and Tejalben v. Mihirbhai Bharatbhai Kothari [(2016) 3 SCC 69] and also order dated 31.3.2023 passed by this Court in Smt. Neha Vaishya v. Shri Mukesh Vaishya M.C.C No. 2735/2018, the cases under Section 9 and 13 of the Hindu

Marriage Act, 1955 filed by the respondent husband be transferred to Jabalpur.

3. Per contra, counsel for respondent husband contends that the present application filed by the petitioner/wife is grossly misconceived. The petitioner wife has taken recourse to a ground that an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C has been filed in Family Court, Jabalpur; whereas the said application under Section 125 Cr.P.C has already been dismissed for want of prosecution.

It is contended by the counsel that the petitioner is not residing in Jabalpur. On the contrary she is residing in Kotma District Anooppur and Kotma District Anoopur is at a distance of 72 k.ms. It is contended by the counsel that apparently the application has been filed on the basis of misconceived grounds. It is also contended by the counsel that not only the inconvenience to the wife but inconvenience to husband is also a criteria which is required to be considered. Therefore, the application deserves to be dismissed. It is further contended by the counsel that respondent/husband is willing to cohabit with the petitioner but the petitioner without assigning any reason has refused. The respondent has filed application under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and later on, on account of total highhanded and callous attitude of the petitioner/wife an application under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act has also been filed by the respondent as without any justifiable reasons the applicant is not willing to reside with the respondent. Accordingly the counsel for respondent submits that the present petitions deserve to be dismissed.

4. No other point is argued or pressed by any of the parties.

5. Heard submissions and perused the record.

6. In the present case, the petitioner/wife is seeking transfer of cases filed by the respondent under Section 9 and 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act before Family Court, Shahdol. The transfer is being sought by the petitioner on the ground that she is resident of Jabalpur and a case under Section 125 Cr.P.C is pending before the Family Court, Jabalpur, therefore, taking into consideration the inconvenience to the petitioner/wife the cases filed by the respondent/husband be transferred to Family Court Jabalpur. In the present case the