ORAL JUDGMENT :- Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard by consent. 2. Learned Counsel appearing for the respondent waives service on behalf of the respondent. 3. By way of present petition, the petitioner is seeking transfer of the proceedings viz. Hindu Marriage Petition No. 322/2006 from the Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division), Jalgaon, to the Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division), Nashik. 4. The marriage between the petitioner and the respondent was solerrmized on 18th January, 2004. However, it is the contention of the petitioner that immediately after marriage, she was made to reside with her parents at Nashik and that thereafter the respondent/husband left to America in connection with his job. It appears that the respondent filed Hindu Marriage Petition No. 322/2006 for a decree of divorce. The petitioner has also filed written statement to the said Hindu Marriage Petition. 5. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner is residing with her father at Nashik. It is the contention of the petitioner that her father, who is working in Public Works Department, has suffered heart stroke. It is further submitted that the petitioner's father is taking medical treatment regularly at Nashik. It is therefore, contended that it is in the interest of justice that the proceedings is transferred from the Court at Jalgaon to the Court at Nashik. The petitioner has further contended that since petitioner's father has suffered heart attack, it is not possible for him to accompany her to Jalgaon on the dates of the said proceedings. It is further submitted that the petitioner has also filed a petition for restitution of conjugal rights. In the said petition, an alternative prayer for divorce is also made. It is further prayed for maintenance in the said proceedings. The said proceedings are registered as Hindu Marriage Petition No. 225/2007. 6. Mr. A. G. Magare, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner, submits that in the interest of justice, it is necessary that the proceedings be transferred from the Court at Jalgaon to the Court at Nashik. He relies on the judgments of the Apex Court in the following cases: (i) Ravinder Kaur vs. Hitinder Singh, AIR 2000 SC 3403 (2). (ii) Renu Gautam vs. Vinod Gautam, AIR 2000 SC 3405 (1). (iii) Madhu Saxena vs. Pankaj Saxena, (2005)13 SCC 158 . He relies on the judgments of the Apex Court in the following cases: (i) Ravinder Kaur vs. Hitinder Singh, AIR 2000 SC 3403 (2). (ii) Renu Gautam vs. Vinod Gautam, AIR 2000 SC 3405 (1). (iii) Madhu Saxena vs. Pankaj Saxena, (2005)13 SCC 158 . (iv) Seema Shrinidhi (Smt.) vs. Praveen Kumar Tiwari, (1997)8 SCC 712 . (v) Leena Mukherjee vs. Rabi Shankar Mukherjee, (2002)10 SCC 480 . 7. Mr. P. P. Dhorde, learned Counsel appearing for the respondent, vehemently opposes the prayer for transfer of the proceedings. He submits that since the marriage was solemnized within the jurisdiction of Jalgaon and since the parties resided together at Jalgaon, the proceedings are tenable at Jalgaon only. He submits that insofar as prejudice to the petitioner is concerned, it can be compensated by directing the respondentlhusband to bear costs of travelling. In support of his submission, he relies on the order passed by learned Single Judge of this Court dated 3rd May, 2007 in Miscellaneous Civil Application No. 17 of 2006, Sau. Sonali Manoj Gurav vs. Manoj Govinda Gurav. He further submits that since the proceedings filed by the respondentlhusband are prior in time, no case is made out for transferring the same at Nashik. 8. It could be seen from the judgments of the Apex Court cited supra by the learned Counsel for the petitioner, that the Apex Court has taken into consideration convenience of the wife and directed proceedings to be transferred to the Court having jurisdiction of a place where wife resides. In the present case, the allegation of the petitioner that the wife is residing at Nashik and her father has suffered heart stroke, has got uncontroverted. 9. It is thus clear that the petitioner who is a lady will be required to travel to Jalgaon without there being any person from her family to accompany her. It can further be seen that as against this, no prejudice would be caused to the respondent/husband. The respondent/husband is presently residing in the United States of America and prosecuting the divorce proceedings through his General Power of Attorney i.e. his brother. It is also not in dispute that the brother of the respondent/husband is presently working and residing at Pune. The distance between Pune and Nashik is about 200 kms., whereas distance between Pune and Jalgaon is more than 450 Kms. It is also not in dispute that the brother of the respondent/husband is presently working and residing at Pune. The distance between Pune and Nashik is about 200 kms., whereas distance between Pune and Jalgaon is more than 450 Kms. As such, if the proceedings are transferred to Nashik, it will not only be convenient to the petitioner/wife but also convenient to the General Power of Attorney of the respondent. He will be required to travel less than half of the distance between Pune and Jalgaon. In that view of the malter, I am inclined to allow the petition. 10. In the result, writ petition is allowed. (i) The proceedings of Hindu Marriage Petition No. 322/2006 tiled by the respondent/husband in the Court of learned Civil Judge (Senior Division) at Jalgaon arc directed to be transferred to the Court of learned Civil Judge (Senior Division) at Nashik for its disposal in accordance with law and on its own merits. (ii) It is further directed that the proceedings pending before learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Nashik, being Hindu Marriage Petition No. 225/2007 and the proceedings which shall be transferred from the Court at Jalgaon to the Court at Nashik in accordance with the directions issued by this Court, will be heard and disposed of together. 11. Rule is made absolute in the above terms with no order as to costs. Petition allowed.