JUDGMENT: The petitioner in this application under section 24 CPC has prayed for transfer of Mat. Suit No.8 of 2014 filed by the opposite party, her husband, pending before the learned court of the Additional District Judge at Nabadwip, Nadia to any other court having jurisdiction to try the case in the District South 24-Parganas. It is a case of the petitioner that after being compelled to leave her matrimonial home at Nabadwip, she is presently residing in Kolkata. She basically resides with her parents at Talpukur Road, PS- Sarsuna Kolkata, but sometimes she resides with her aunt at Paikpara, PS – Chitpore, Kolkata. She has no independent source of income and she is totally dependent upon her parents for maintaining herself. She has filed an application under section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate at Alipore, South 24-Parganas. In the said application an order was passed directing the opposite party to pay a sum of Rs.2000 to her. The opposite party has challenged the said order by filing an application before the Sessions Judge at Alipore. Thus, not only the original application filed by the petitioner under section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 but also the revisional application filed by the opposite party is also pending in the Alipore court. For that purpose the opposite party visits the Alipore court. The petitioner has also filed an application under section 125 CrPC against the opposite party which is pending before the Sealdah court. It is the further case of the petitioner that since she is in deep financial distress, it would be extremely difficult for her to contest the matrimonial suit filed by the opposite party before the Nabadwip court by travelling more than 100 kilometres from Kolkata where she presently resides. By an order dated May 13, 2015 the petitioner was directed to serve a copy of this application upon the opposite party. The petitioner has complied with the aforesaid order. Mr Roy appears for the opposite party. Mr Roy submits that this application can be disposed of on the basis of the averments made in the application. According to him, none of the averments contained in the application warrants any order being passed as prayed for by the petitioner. The petitioner has complied with the aforesaid order. Mr Roy appears for the opposite party. Mr Roy submits that this application can be disposed of on the basis of the averments made in the application. According to him, none of the averments contained in the application warrants any order being passed as prayed for by the petitioner. Mr Roy further submitted that in the matrimonial suit, apart from the parties to this application, one Sujit Banik has been impleaded as defendant no.2. According to him, since the said Sujit Banik being the defendant no.2 has not been impleaded in this application, the application is defective. However, Mr Moitra appearing for the petitioner submits that in the said matrimonial suit Sujit Banik has been impleaded motivatedly and no relief has been claimed for him. According to Mr Moitra, for the purpose of considering the merits of this application it is the convenience of the husband and wife in the matrimonial suit which is to be taken into consideration and as such the said Sujit Banik was not made party in this section 24 CPC application. Considering the statements in the application and the submissions made by both Mr Moitra and Mr Roy respectively, I am inclined to accept the contention of Mr Moitra. In the instant case there is no dispute that the matrimonial suit filed by the opposite party, which is prayed for to be transferred by the petitioner, is a suit between the husband and the wife and it is the advantage and/or disadvantage of the husband and wife only which is to be primarily considered for the purpose of deciding this application. After considering the statements made in the application and the submissions made by Mr Moitra and Mr Roy respectively, I find that the petitioner has substantiated the extreme difficulty she will face to contest the matrimonial suit before the Nabadwip court at Nadia. On the other hand, the opposite party is already contesting the proceeding filed by the petitioner under section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 before the Alipore court without any difficulty. Mr Roy could not dispute the factum that there are two proceedings which are (as stated above) already pending before the Alipore court and the opposite party has no grievance to contest the said proceeding in the Alipore court. Mr Roy could not dispute the factum that there are two proceedings which are (as stated above) already pending before the Alipore court and the opposite party has no grievance to contest the said proceeding in the Alipore court. In the instant case, the petitioner has specifically stated the difficulties she will face to contest the said matrimonial suit before the Nabadwip court at Nadia. In these circumstances, I find merit in this application. Accordingly, the District Judge at Nabadwip, Nadia is directed to forthwith transmit the records of Mat Suit No.8 of 2014 (Sri Dependu Saha Bhowmick v. Pooja Saha Bhowmick nee Saha & Anr.) to the court of the District Judge at Alipore, South 24-Parganas. It is made clear that once the records of Mat Suit No.8 of 2014 is transmitted to the Alipore court, the said suit may be decided either by the District Judge, Alipore or to any delegated court having jurisdiction to entertain the matrimonial suit. Since the opposite party no.1 was not required to file affidavit-in-opposition, the allegations made in this application shall be deemed not to have been admitted by him. At this juncture, Mr Moitra submits that due to the difficulties faced by the petitioner in contesting the matrimonial suit before the Nabadwip court, she was unable to file her written statement and prayed for an order to file her written statement. I find substance in such submission of Mr Moitra that the petitioner has stated in detail her difficulty in appearing before the Additional District Judge at Nabadwip to contest the matrimonial suit. The facts stated in this application sufficiently explain the reasons which prevented the petitioner from filing written statement in the matrimonial suit before the Additional District Judge, Nabadwip. Accordingly, the petitioner will be entitled to file written statement before the District Judge at Alipore or the delegated court, as the case may be, within eight weeks from the date of receipt of notice from the court of the learned District Judge or the designated court, as the case may be, about receipt of the records of the matrimonial suit from the court of the Additional District Judge and to contest the matrimonial proceeding. With the aforesaid directions, CO No.1703 of 2015 is disposed of. However, there shall be no order as to costs.