ORDER 1. HEARD LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PARTIES. 2. LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE PETITIONER WIFE REPEATEDLY REITERATED THE STAND TAKEN, IN JUSTIFICATION FOR THE TRANSFER SOUGHT, BASED ON THE ILL HEALTH OF THE PETITIONER WIFE. FROM THE MATERIALS DISCLOSED IN THE PLEADINGS, IT APPEARS THAT THE PARTIES ARE NOT WILLING TO RECONCILE AND/OR RESUME COHABITATION. EXCEPT FOR ASKING THE TRANSFER, THE ULTIMATE AND RESULTANT OBJECT FLOWING OUT OF THE TRANSFER EVEN IF TO BE ORDERED BY THIS COURT, IN OUR VIEW, MAY NOT EITHER SERVE ANY CONSTRUCTIVE PURPOSE OR SEEM TO BE IN THE INTEREST OF EITHER OF THE PARTIES. THE TRANSFER PETITION, THEREFORE, FAILS AND SHALL STAND DISMISSED. 3. HOWEVER, KEEPING INTO ACCOUNT THE AILMENT OF THE WIFE PLEADED AND FINANCIAL CONSTRAINTS ON HER, IT IS MADE CLEAR THAT THE RESPONDENT HUSBAND SHALL BEAR ALL THE NECESSARY EXPENSES FOR THE TRAVEL AND STAY OF THE PETITIONER WIFE, TO CONTEST THE CLAIM BY GOING PERSONALLY TO THE PLACE WHERE THE PETITION FOR DIVORCE PRESENTLY IS PENDING. IF NEED BE, THE LEARNED TRIAL JUDGE, BEFORE WHOM THE SAID PETITION FILED BY THE RESPONDENT HUSBAND IS PENDING, SHALL ALSO CONSIDER THE QUESTION OF EXAMINING THE PETITIONER WIFE ON COMMISSION IF THE CONDITION OF HEALTH OF THE PETITIONER WIFE DOES NOT PERMIT HER GOING OVER IN PERSON TO CONTEST THE PROCEEDINGS FILED BY THE RESPONDENT HUSBAND.