JUDGMENT Hon’ble Sudhanshu Dhulia, J. (Oral) 1. Heard Ms. Geeta Parihar, Advocate for the applicant and Mr. H. S. Dhillon, Advocate for the respondent. 2. Counter Affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent in Court today is taken on record. 3. This is a transfer application before this Court under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The applicant Roshi Devi and the respondent Lalit Mohen Chaudhary are the wife and husband. Admittedly, their marriage was solemnized as per the Hindu rites and rituals on 2.3.2009 at Kotdwar, District Pauri Garhwal. For the last two years, as alleged by the applicant in para 6 of her affidavit, she is residing at Kotdwar, District Pauri Garhwal in her parental house with her mother and other members of the family. It also appears that the respondent and the applicant who are husband and wife are last resided in Nainital as husband and wife. 4. Now a suit being suit no. 238 of 2011 has been filed by the husband for restitution of conjugal rights before the Family Court, Nainital. As per Section 19 of the Act, both the courts Nainital as well as court of Pauri Garhwal at Kotdwar have the jurisdiction to entertain such a petition under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act. 5. Reasons assigned by the husband-respondent for filing such a petition at Nainital in its counter affidavit are that he is unable to attend the Court at Kotdwar because he is only son of his parents and his father is a heart patient. His father requires care and only he can look after his father. Secondly, he states that in the case of restitution of conjugal rights, presence of the applicant (i.e. his wife) is not required on every date in the court below, and as such there is no reasons to transfer the case from the Principal Judge Family Court, Nainital to the Principal Judge Family Court, Pauri Garhwal. 6. On the other hand, the applicant in the present transfer application has cited difficulties in attending the court at Nainital, as she is a woman and resides at Kotdwar and has a child aged about two years and needs care and it is difficult for her to attend the court at Nainital which is at a distance of 230 Km. from Kotdwar. 7. from Kotdwar. 7. Considering the reasons expressed by both the parties for contesting the case at Nainital and Pauri Garhwal respectively, this Court on a balance finds that the applicant being a woman who has to rear a two years old girl child has far more difficulties to travel between Kotdwar and Nainital than the respondent i.e. her husband. Moreover, the cause of action under Section 19 is also at Pauri Garhwal as well for filing the petition under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act. Therefore, the transfer application is allowed. The case no.2 38 of 2011 is transferred from Principal Judge Family Court, Nainital to Principal Judge Family Court, Pauri Garhwal. 8. Registry is directed to convey this order to the Family Court, Nainital and Pauri Garhwal for compliance as expeditiously as possible.