JUDGMENT 1. - This S.B. Civil Transfer Petition has been filed by the petitioner Smt. Sobha w/o Arvind, b/c Dabgar, r/o Opp. Mahasatiyon-ki-Chatriya, Near Jain Mandir, Ayad, Udaipur for transferring Civil Misc. Case No.40/2010 (Arvind v. Smt. Sobha) filed under section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, pending trial before the learned Addl. District Judge, Sumerpur, District Pali to the court of Judge, Family Court, Udaipur. 2. The facts in brief are that the marriage between petitioner Sobha and respondent Arvind took place on 09.03.2008 and out of their wedlock a girl child was born to them. The younger sister of the petitioner was also got married with the younger brother of the respondent. Soon after the marriage, there was some dispute between the younger sister of the petitioner and the younger brother of the respondent and the younger sister of the petitioner went away to her matrimonial house and for that reason, the respondent started harassing the petitioner. It was further averred that thereafter the petitioner and her daughter is residing at her maternal house. The respondent apprehending some legal action, filed an application under section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act for restitution of conjugal rights before the Addl. District Judge, Sumerpur, Distt. Pali, which was registered as Civil Misc. Case No. 40/2010. The petitioner also preferred an application under section 125 Cr.P.C. before the Judge, Family Court, Udaipur for maintenance for herself and her daughter. The petitioner has preferred this Transfer Petition for transferring the above case pending trial before the learned Addl.District Judge, Sumerpur, Distt.Pali to the court of Judge, Family Court, Udaipur. 3. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is a lady having a child of 7 months and the petition under section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act has been instituted by her husband at Sumerpur, which is about 200 Kms. away from Udaipur. Therefore, it is very difficult for her to attend the present case at Sumerpur. In addition to it it is further contended by the counsel that she has already filed an application under section 125 Cr.P.C. at Udaipur. 4. The petition is opposed by the learned counsel for the respondent contending that the convenience of the wife cannot be a sole ground for transferring the case. Therefore, transfer petition is liable to be dismissed. 5. 4. The petition is opposed by the learned counsel for the respondent contending that the convenience of the wife cannot be a sole ground for transferring the case. Therefore, transfer petition is liable to be dismissed. 5. I have perused the facts pleaded in the transfer petition. It has been pleaded in the petition that in addition to inconvenience, she has an apprehension for her security. 6. I have considered the submissions of the learned counsel for the parties. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the case of Sumita Singh v. Kumar Sanjay [(2001) 10 SCC 41] observed that if suit is filed by husband then wife's convenience must be looked at and held that circumstances indicated in the judgment are sufficient to make the transfer petition absolute. 7. No doubt distance between Udaipur and Sumerpur is about 200 Kms. and it is very difficult for a lady to attend the case at Sumerpur, that too with a child of seven months. In these circumstances, I think it fit and proper to transfer the above case from the court of Addl. District Judge, Sumerpur to the Family Court, Udaipur. 8. Consequently, the transfer petition is allowed the Petition under section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act bearing No. 40/2000, Arvind v. Smt. Sobha , pending before the court of learned Addl. District Judge, Sumerpur is transferred to the Family Court, Udaipur. The learned Addl. District Judge, Sumerpur is directed to transfer the above case to the Family court Udaipur and the Judge, Family Court, Udaipur is directed to decide the same expeditiously in accordance with law. Copy of this order be sent for information and compliance to both the courts mentioned above.Petition allowed. *******