JUDGMENT : Ashis Kumar Charkraborty, J. - In this application under section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure the petitioner wife has prayed for, transfer of the matrimonial suit filed by the opposite party husband, claiming a decree for dissolution of marriage and pending before the Court of the learned 7th Additional District Judge, Alipore to the Court of the learned District and Sessions Judge, Paschim Medinipore. 2. On March 1, 2016 this Court directed the petitioner to serve a copy of this application on the opposite party. On April 5, 2016 when this application was taken up for hearing, an affidavit of service was filed on behalf of the petitioner stating that a copy of the application as was forwarded to the opposite party at his address mentioned at himself in the plaint filed in the matrimonial suit was returned by the postal authority with an endorsement "insufficient address". Being prima facie satisfied with the grounds urged by the petitioner in this application on April 5, 2016 this Court passed an interim order directing stay of all further proceedings in the matrimonial suit pending before the learned Court below till May 6, 2016. The petitioner was directed to serve a copy of this application on the learned advocate representing the opposite party in the matrimonial suit before the Court below. 3. On April 27, 2016 when the application was taken up for hearing it was found that a copy of the application and the order passed by this Court forwarded to the learned advocate of the opposite party before the learned Court below was returned by the postal authority with an endorsement "delivery attempted – misspent". The petitioner was directed to communicate the order passed by this Court to the learned advocate representing the opposite party before the learned Court below by way of personal service. 4. On May 11, 2016 when the application was taken up for hearing, the learned advocate appeared for the opposite party and prayed for an opportunity to file an affidavit in opposition to this application. Today this application is taken up for hearing after completion of all pleadings by the respective parties. 5. 4. On May 11, 2016 when the application was taken up for hearing, the learned advocate appeared for the opposite party and prayed for an opportunity to file an affidavit in opposition to this application. Today this application is taken up for hearing after completion of all pleadings by the respective parties. 5. It is the case of the petitioner that after being compelled to leave the matrimonial home, she is presently residing at Kharagpur and she is facing great hardship to contest the matrimonial suit before the Court of the learned 7th Additional District Judge, Alipore, District : South 24 Parganas by travelling the long distance between Kharagpur and the learned Court at Alipore. The proceeding filed by the petitioner against the opposite party under section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and Section 23(2) of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act are pending before the Court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Paschim Medinipore and the learned Judicial Magistrate, 3rd Court, Paschim Medinipore and the opposite party is contesting both the said proceedings before the learned Courts at Paschim Medinipore. 6. Relying on the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Tejalben v. Mihirbhai Bharatbhai Kothari, reported in AIR 2016 SC 718 Mr. Shantanu Mukherjee, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that in addition to the hardship faced by the petitioner to contest the matrimonial suit before the Court of the learned 7th Additional District Judge, Alipore by travelling the long distance from her residence at Kharagpur, since the proceeding under section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure as also the proceeding under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, against the opposite party are pending before the learned Courts at Paschim Medinipore, it is a fit case that the matrimonial suit should be transferred from the Court of the learned 7th Additional District Judge, Alipore to the Court of the learned District Judge, Paschim Medinipore. 7. However, Mr. S.P. Mukherjee, learned counsel appearing for the opposite party, submitted that opposite party is employed with a renowned school in the city of Kolkata. 7. However, Mr. S.P. Mukherjee, learned counsel appearing for the opposite party, submitted that opposite party is employed with a renowned school in the city of Kolkata. He drew attention of this Court to the letter of appointment of the opposite party and submitted that the service conditions of the opposite party is so stringent that if he remains absent from his service on the ground of contesting the aforementioned criminal proceeding lodged against him by the petitioner or to proceed with the matrimonial suit before the Court of the learned District Judge, Paschim Medinipore, he will face difficulty. 8. Having considered the facts of the case discussed above, I am satisfied that the petitioner has substantiated the hardship faced by her to contest the matrimonial suit before the learned 7th Additional District Judge at Alipore, by travelling the long distance from Kharagpur. Further since the opposite party is already contesting the two criminal proceedings filed against him before the Court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Paschim Medinipore and the learned Judicial Magistrate, 3rd Court, Paschim Medinipore, in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Tejalben v. Mihirbhai Bharatbhai Kothari (supra), the matrimonial suit should also transfer to the Court of the learned District Judge at Paschim Medinipore. 9. For all the foregoing reasons, the Matrimonial Suit No. 84 of 2015 (Deepak Chowdhury v. Prova Chowdhury) is withdrawn from the Court of the learned 7th Additional District Judge, South 24 Parganas and the same is transferred to the Court of the learned District Judge, Paschim Medinipore. 10. The learned District Judge, South 24 Parganas is directed to forthwith transmit all the records of the Matrimonial Suit No. 84 of 2015 (Deepak Chowdhury v. Prova Chowdhury) to the Court of the learned District Judge, Paschim Medinipore. 11. It is made clear that the learned District Judge, Paschim Medinipore may assign the matrimonial suit to the Court of any learned Additional District Judge, Paschim Medinipore (Sadar) having determination to entertain the matrimonial suit. 12. With the above directions, CO 726 of 2016 stands disposed of. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Certified website copies of the order, if applied for, be urgently made available to the parties, subject to compliance with all requisite formalities.