( 1 ) THIS petition is filed seeking transfer of o. P. No. 237 of 2001 on the file of the Family court, Vijayawada, to any Court at hyderabad or Ranga Reddy District. ( 2 ) THE contention of the petitioner, who is the wife of the respondent, is that since she is a helpless lady with old parents who cannot render any assistance it would be difficult for her to go to Vijayawada to attend the hearings of O. P. No. 237 of 2001 filed by the respondent seeking divorce, and since respondent has to come to hyderabad in connection with a Criminal revision Petition filed by her against the order refusing to grant maintenance to her, o. P. No. 237 of 2001 filed by the respondent may be transferred to any Court at hyderabad or Ranga Reddy District. ( 3 ) LEARNED Counsel for petitioner placing strong reliance on the letters said to have been written by the petitioner to her parents during 1994, contended that the contents in those letters would clinchingly establish that the petitioner was being subjected to harassment and cruelty by the respondent, and if the petitioner were to go to vijayawada alone, there is every possibility of the respondent forcing her to sign on certain documents by putting her under threat, the case may be transferred from vijayawada to Hyderabad. ( 4 ) THE contention of the learned Counsel for the respondent is that the averments in the affidavit of the petitioner filed in support of the application show that respondent and the petitioner were living happily till 1996, and so the letters of 1994 being relied on by the petitioner, to show that she was harassed and has subject to cruelty, can have no relevance, and in fact in one of the letters written by the petitioner to the parents, being relied on by the petitioner, petitioner made a request to her parents to deposit money in the name of her son, and contended that the fact that the case filed by the petitioner under Sec. 125 cr. P. C. seeking maintenance from the respondent was dismissed shows that she herself opted to stay away from the petitioner and contended that since the respondent is jobless now, it would be difficult for him to attend any Court at hyderabad for every hearing and that there are no grounds to transfer the O. P. ( 5 ) LACK of means of a wife, by itself, is not a ground for seeking transfer, because under Section 24 of the Hindu Marriage act, she can seek interim maintenance and expenses for defending the proceedings from the husband. If petitioner has no means to attend the hearings to defend the proceedings at Vijayawada, she can file a petition under Section 24 of the Hindu marriage Act for interim maintenance and expenses for travel by establishing the necessary ingredients for seeking relief under the said Section. So, lack of means is not a ground for transfer of the O. P. ( 6 ) MAINTENANCE Case filed by the petitioner against the respondent under section 125 Cr. P. C. was dismissed. According to the petitioner the Criminal revision Petition filed by her against the order of dismissal is pending. Since presence of the respondent would not be necessary at the hearing of Criminal revision Petition, Respondent need not make visits to Hyderabad in connection with the hearing of Criminal Revision petition. The contention of the petitioner that there is a likelihood of her being put to threat or being coerced to affix her signature on some documents is farfetched, and has no basis. ( 7 ) THEREFORE, I find no grounds to transfer O. P. No. 237 of 2001 from Family court, Vijayawada, to Hyderabad. The petition is dismissed. No costs.