ORDER : BUDI HABUNG, J. Heard Mr. D.J. Boro, learned counsel for the petitioner. I have also heard Mr. P. Bhardwaj, learned counsel for the respondent. 2. This petition filed this application under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 seeking transfer of the Title Suit(Mat) No.112/2024, from the Court of District Judge Sonitpur at Tezpur to the Court of District and Sessions Judge Jorhat. 3. The case of the petitioner is that she is the wife and the respondent is the husband and their marriage was solemnized at Jorhat on 27.11.2009 as per the Hindu rituals and customs. Out of their marriage they have begotten one girl child now aged about 13 years. The respondent has filed Title Suit (Mat) No.112/2024, before the Court of Addl.District and Sessions Judge Sonitpur, at Tezpur under section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act,1955, against the petitioner, seeking a decree of Restitution of Conjugal Rights between the parties. The petitioner received notice from the Court of Addl.District and Sessions Judge, Sonitpur, Tezpur, for her appearance on 06.09.2024, for ex-parte evidence. 4. It is submitted that the petitioner is working as Ward Sahayika in 5AF hospital under the Air Force Station, Jorhat, and is living alone in a rented house with her daughter who is studying at class IX at Air Force School, Jorhat and she is totally dependent on her own earning. Under such circumstances, it is submitted that it will be inconvenient and troublesome for the petitioner to travel all the way from Jorhat to Tezpur which is about 350 Km in order to contest the aforesaid case, as according to the petitioner, there is no direct communication of public transportation from her stay place to Tezpur. 4. The petitioner contended that the respondent is well settled in business, having commendable source of income, and he is staying just about 10 Kms away from the Court of Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Tezpur, and it is alleged that the respondent had filed the said case for restitution of Conjugal Rights only to harass the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner prays for transfer of the Title Suit (Mat) No.112/2024, from the Court of District Judge, Sonitpur at Tezpur to the Court of District and Sessions Judge Jorhat, 5. District and Sessions Judge, Tezpur, and it is alleged that the respondent had filed the said case for restitution of Conjugal Rights only to harass the petitioner. Therefore, the petitioner prays for transfer of the Title Suit (Mat) No.112/2024, from the Court of District Judge, Sonitpur at Tezpur to the Court of District and Sessions Judge Jorhat, 5. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent referring to the written objection filed by the respondent submitted that the present petition is not maintainable as the same has not filed Bonafide. It is submitted that the petitioner had the time and convenience to travel to Guwahati to sign the affidavit to file the instant petition,while contending that she is unable to attend the Court at Tezpur which is much nearer to Guwahati. The learned counsel for the respondent further submits that the respondent has filed the Title Suit(Mat) No.112/2024 for a decree against the petitioner for restitution of Conjugal Rights in the best interest of their family as well as their daughter and he is ready and willing to co-habit with the petitioner in the interest. Furthermore, it is submitted that the distance between the Rangai Habi near Air Force Station, Jorhat, where the petitioner stays and the Guwahati High Court is around 307 KMs, whereas the distance between Rangai-Habi near Air Force Station, Rowriah of Jorhat and the Court of District Judge,Sonitpur, Tezpur is only around 167 KMs, which is around half the distance the petitioner had already travelled to file the instant petition. 6. The learned counsel for the respondent further submits that while the petitioner travelled to attend the Court at Tezpur, their daughter could very well stay with his parents as his mother is always available at Tezpur. However, the petitioner chooses to travel all the way to Guwahati whose distance is much longer than Tezpur. Additionally, the learned counsel for the respondent submits that the respondent works as daily wage earner and has no regular income, and the petitioner is aware of the same. It is further submitted that after marriage, the respondent and the petitioner stayed together as husband and wife in Jorhat for some time, thereafter,they moved to Sitabasti, Chalagaon, near the Air Force Station, Tezpur and then both had moved to Punjab along with the father of the respondent, who was transferred to Punjab. It is further submitted that after marriage, the respondent and the petitioner stayed together as husband and wife in Jorhat for some time, thereafter,they moved to Sitabasti, Chalagaon, near the Air Force Station, Tezpur and then both had moved to Punjab along with the father of the respondent, who was transferred to Punjab. And while staying at Punjab his father helped the petitioner in getting her job in the Indian Air Force as a Ward Sahayika. But after getting the job, the petitioner’s behavior had changed towards the respondent and his family. It is also submitted that the respondent filed the petition for Restitution of Conjugal Rights before the Court of District Judge, Sonitpur at Tezpur in the interest of their family as well as the child, and never to harass the petitioner. On the other hand, the petitioner rather have filed the present transfer petition in order to harass the respondent. The learned counsel for the respondent further submits that since the respondent is a daily wage earner, he has no sufficient means to visit Jorhat to attend the Court, if the present case is transferred to Jorhat. For the grounds and reasons stated above, the learned counsel for the respondent further submits that the petitioner has no case and therefore, the same be dismissed and the interim order be vacated. 7. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record. 8. upon hearing the parties and on perusal of the records, it appears that the respondent husband has filed the Title Suit(Mat) No.112/2024, before the Court of District Judge Sonitpur at Tezpur seeking a decree of Restitution of Conjugal Rights between the petitioner and the respondent. On perusal of the contention made in the transfer petition, nowhere the petitioner has mentioned any reasons for her staying separately from the respondent husband at Jorhat nor has made any allegation of ill treatment by the respondent husband and family. She has only mentioned regarding her inconvenience to attend the Court at Tezpur, which is about 167 Km distance from Jorhat. However, it appears that the petitioner has filed the present petition at Guwahati which is about 307 km from Jorhat. 9. She has only mentioned regarding her inconvenience to attend the Court at Tezpur, which is about 167 Km distance from Jorhat. However, it appears that the petitioner has filed the present petition at Guwahati which is about 307 km from Jorhat. 9. It is understood that while deciding the transfer application, the Court is required to give more weightage and consideration to the female litigants and transfer of legal proceeding from one Court to another Court should ordinarily be allowed, taking into consideration their convenience and Court should desist from putting female litigants in undue hardship. However, in the instant case, admittedly, the petitioner is a regular employee of the Indian Air Force, earning sufficiently for herself. It is also seen that she could afford to travel to attend Court at Guwahati to file the present petition, it appears that she has the capacity to manage to attend the Court at Jorhat. On the other hand, the respondent husband is unemployed and a daily wage earner, therefore, it appears that it would be difficult for him to manage to travel to Guwahati to attend the Court.Thus, it appears that the petitioner is in a better position to travel 167 Kms to attend Court than the respondent husband who is surviving on his daily wage earning. Moreover, the learned counsel for the respondent submits that unlike in the family Court at Metro, the parties in the District Court are not required to attend the court regularly in person except for 2-3 occasion at the stage of evidence and cross examination. 10. Under the circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that the petitioner has failed to make out her case for transfer of the (Mat) No.112/2024, from the Court of District Judge Sonitpur at Tezpur to the Court of District and Sessions Judge Jorhat. Accordingly, this petition is dismissed. With the above observation, this transfer petition stand disposed of.