1. The prayer made in this transfer petition is that the matter pending before the learned Additional District Judge (Matrimonial Cases) Jammu titled as Sham Lal v. Rajni Devi and anr be transferred to the Court of learned Principal District Judge Samba. 2. According to the averments made in the petition, the petitioner-wife has two children from the wedlock who are 9 and 7 years old. Both the children have been living with her. She has been forced to live with her father Shri Dhani Ram at Village Katli Tehsil and District Samba. It has been emphasized that the Court at Jammu has no jurisdiction because the place does not fall within the jurisdiction of that Court where the marriage was solemnized nor it is a place within whose jurisdiction the parties have last resided together. Mr. Choudhary, learned counsel for the petitioner has also pointed out that application under Section 488 Cr. P. C for claiming maintenance has been filed by the petitioner in the Court at Samba. He has also placed reliance on various judgments of Hon'ble the Supreme Court to buttress his argument that convenience of wife has to be taken into account in such like matters. 3. Mr. Malhotra, learned counsel for the respondent husband has stated that the petitioner-wife had been living in adultery which compelled the respondent-husband to file a petition under Section 13 of the J&K Hindu Marriage Act for divorce. Mr. Malhotra further states that his client at present is posted in Bihar in Seema Suraksha Bal (SSB) and, therefore, it would be convenient for him either to prosecute his petition at Jammu or it may be transferred to the Court of competent jurisdiction at R.S. Pura. Mr. Malhotra further states that respondent is regularly paying Rs. 3500/- per month as maintenance charges to the petitioner and that petition seeking maintenance has been settled and is likely to be disposed of in the National Lok Adalat on 23.11.2013. 4. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and persuing the Parawise comments received from the Presiding Officer, I am of the considered view that this petition deserves to be allowed. Hon'ble the Supreme Court in a catena of judgments has opined that in case it is in convenient for both husband and wife to prosecute their cases, preference has to be given to the convenience of the wife. Hon'ble the Supreme Court in a catena of judgments has opined that in case it is in convenient for both husband and wife to prosecute their cases, preference has to be given to the convenience of the wife. In that regard reliance may be place on the observations made by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in Uma Parekh V. Ajeet Pareek (2005) 9 SCC 600 and Laxmi Devi v. Rajesh Kumar Sanadhy 9 (2002) 10 SCC 693 . In the instant case it is evident that the petitioner with her two children has been residing with her father at village Katli which falls in District Samba. The Court at Jammu has no jurisdiction over the matter. It is true that husband-respondent would face some inconvenience if the matter is transferred to Samba but the in-convenience of petitioner-wife would be much greater. Therefore, the Petition deserves to be accepted. 5. As a sequel to the above discussion, this petition succeeds. The proceedings in case titled Sham Lal v. Rajni Devi and anr, pending in the court of Learned Additional District Judge (Matrimonial Cases) Jammu are ordered to be transferred to the court of learned Principal District Judge Samba. Learned Additional District Judge (Matrimonial Cases) Jammu shall transmit the record of the file to the learned District Judge Samba after retaining a photocopy of the file for record. Parties are directed to appear before Principal District Judge, Samba on 29.11.2013.