[2025:RJ-JP:9735] HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Transfer Application No. 36/2025 Smt. Sandhya Nama W/o Ramballabh Nama D/o Satish Nama Meratwal (Agra Wale), Aged About 37 Years, Presently Residing At Plot No. 28, Namdev Colony-B, Sanganer, District Jaipur (Rajasthan) ----Petitioner Versus Ramballabh Nama S/o Shri Babu Lal Ji Nama, Aged About 40 Years, R/o New Market City, Sawai Madhopur. ----Respondent For Petitioner(s) : Ms. Rekha Gupta & Ms. Jashoda Sharma For Respondent(s) : None present HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR JAIN Order 04/03/2025 1. None present for the respondent, despite service of notice. 2. Service complete. 3. The instant S.B. Civil Transfer Application is preferred by the petitioner (wife) to transfer a pending matrimonial case No.95/2024 filed by respondent (husband) under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act of 1955’), from the Family Court, Sawai Madhopur to the Court of the Additional District Judge No.10, HQ Sanganer, Jaipur Metropolitan- I, Jaipur. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has filed this transfer application to transfer a matrimonial case to the place wherein she is residing after breakdown of marriage. [2025:RJ-JP:9735] (2 of 3) [CTA-36/2025] She further submits that to harass the petitioner, a case has been filed by the respondent at Sawai Madhopur. She further submits that the petitioner is non-earning and she is financially dependent upon her family, therefore, it would be inconvenient for her to attend case in different jurisdiction. 5. None present for the respondent to oppose the present transfer petition. 6. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the material available on record. 7. In cases of Sumita Singh Vs. Kumar Sanjay and Anr. : AIR 2002 (SC) 396, Vimi Mathur Vs. Vikas Mathur (2004) 13 SCC 435 and Gargi Konar v Jagjeet Singh (2005) 11 SCC 446 Hon’ble Supreme Court considering transfer petition and allowed the same only on the ground of convenience of wife. In case of Smt. Vinita Vs. Himanshu :AIR 2017 Raj. 102, a Co- ordinate Bench of this Court while considering the transfer petition filed by wife to transfer a matrimonial proceedings from one place to another has observed that normal practice of the Courts in matter of transfer is to lean in favour of wife on the ground of convenience, cost and comfort of wife. 8. Considering entire analogy behind convenience to a female litigant, it is appropriate to allow the transfer application and to transfer the case as per convenience of the petitioner. 9. In view of aforesaid, the transfer application is hereby allowed and the case No.95/2024 is withdrawn from the Family Court, Sawai Madhopur and assigned and transferred to the Court [2025:RJ-JP:9735] (3 of 3) [CTA-36/2025] of the Additional District Judge No.10, HQ Sanganer, Jaipur Metropolitan-I, Jaipur. 10. The concerned Court is directed to assign a date of appearance before the new Court and transmit the record at earliest. 11. With the aforesaid, the transfer petition and the other misc. application stand disposed of. (ASHOK KUMAR JAIN),J MR/61