JUDGMENT : ( 1. ) THIS is an application for transfer under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure. ( 2. ) THE parties were married in February, 1980. The applicant/ wife resides in Jabalpur, while the non-applicant/husband resides at Sehore. As a result of their wedlock, two children were born in 1982 and 1984. Meanwhile, the non-applicant started making demands for more dowry. Since her father is only a peon drawing a salary of Rs. 400/- per month, his additional demands could not be fulfilled. As a result, the non-applicant started ill-treating and neglecting her. She contracted tuberculosis for which no steps were taken by him for her treatment. In April 1986, she was pushed out from the house and since then, she is living with her children with her father at Jabalpur. It is also alleged by her that she filed a petition under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure vide Misc. Cri. Case No. 718 in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class. Notice to the non-applicant has not so far been served. As a counter blast, the non-applicant filed a suit for restitution of conjugal rights in the Court of District Judge, Sehore. Summons of the suit has not served on her also. It is stated that if she is required to attend the suit at Sehore, she has to carry both the children with her and her father as a security measure and all this may involve an expenditure of Rs. 400/- per hearing. According to her, she is not employed anywhere, while according to the non-applicant, she is working as a teacher in some school run by Vidya Mandir. The non-applicant is employed as a lower division clerk in the Madhya Pradesh Electricity Board and is earning a salary of Rs. 1,700/- per month, besides other facilities. It was, therefore, urged that considering conveniences and inconveniences of both parties, it will be in the interest of justice if the said suit is transferred to some Court at Jabalpur. ( 3. ) MY attention was drawn to Meerabai Pasi v. Shivshankar Pasi (1985 MPWN Note 388) and Om Prakash v. Smt. Mandakni ( 1985 MPWN 487 ) by the non-applicant, which lays down that poverty itself is no ground to order transfer of suit. ( 3. ) MY attention was drawn to Meerabai Pasi v. Shivshankar Pasi (1985 MPWN Note 388) and Om Prakash v. Smt. Mandakni ( 1985 MPWN 487 ) by the non-applicant, which lays down that poverty itself is no ground to order transfer of suit. On behalf of the applicant M. C. C. No. 410 of 1987 dated 27-6-1988 (Smt. Mirabai v. Premlal) was relied wherein on somewhat similar facts and circumstances, transfer petition was allowed. ( 4. ) ON going through the aforesaid cases and considering respective arguments of the parties, I am of the opinion that this application must be allowed. One has to take into consideration that the parties are blessed with two children who reside with wife at Jabalpur. They are hardly 4 and 6 years only. Her age is stated to be 25 years. Keeping in view the prevailing customs, it will not be possible for her to undertake journey with children by herself unless some male member escorts her to Sehore. Journey by rail to Sehore by a direct available train is time consuming and in order to attend at 11 a. m. , she has to start from Jabalpur at least two days before and return two days thereafter to Jabalpur, Railway fare for two adults for return journey will be near about Rs. 250/- and expenses for lodging and boarding may at least Rs. 150/ -. It is not certain how may hearings actually that suit may take at Sehore. Court can award expenses but that has to be commensurate with the income of the other party. As against this, the husband will have to Undertake journey single handed and burden of expenditure will be comparatively low on him. One has to bear in mind the suit for restitution was filed only after notice of the application under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was sought to be served on him. ( 5. ) IN Om Prakashs case (supra), husband filed a suit at Ratlam, while wife filed a suit at Ujjain thereafter. This Court allowed the husbands prayer by directing transfer of the wifes suit to Ratlam where the first suit was filed. ( 5. ) IN Om Prakashs case (supra), husband filed a suit at Ratlam, while wife filed a suit at Ujjain thereafter. This Court allowed the husbands prayer by directing transfer of the wifes suit to Ratlam where the first suit was filed. In the present case also proceedings under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure have been initiated earlier, and therefore, it will be more convenient for the non-applicant to prosecute his suit as also defend that petition under Section 125 Cr. P. C. at Jabalpur. ( 6. ) THE application is allowed. Civil Suit No. 41-A of 1987 between the parties pending in the Court of District Judge, Sehore, is transferred to the Court of District Judge, Jabalpur, for trial and disposal according to law. No order as to costs.