ORDER : 1. Despite service of notice, nobody has put in appearance on behalf of the respondent- husband. 2. The present transfer application under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, seeking transfer of the Divorce Petition No. 52/2014 titled as Vinod Vaishnav vs. Smt. Uma, under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, filed by the respondent-husband, which is pending before Additional District Judge, Bhinmal to the competent Court at Sumerpur. 3. Mr. Ramesh Purohit, learned counsel for the petitioner-wife, narrating the facts relevant for the purpose of deciding the present transfer application, submitted that the petitioner got married with the respondent on 27.02.2009, after observing the customs and rituals prevailing in Hindus. However, her matrimonial relationship with the respondent-husband could not go smoothly, in wake of ill-treatment meted out to her by the respondent-husband, for which, she has come to Sumerpur to live with her parents. 4. The petitioner has filed a case under Section 12 read with Sections 18, 19, 20, 22 and 23 of the Protection from Domestic Violence Act against the respondent-husband in the Court of competent jurisdiction, which is pending adjudication before Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Sumerpur, District Pali. In the meanwhile, the respondent-husband has filed a petition for divorce under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act before the Additional District Judge, Bhinmal. 5. Mr. Ramesh Purohit, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner finds it difficult and troublesome to travel to Bhinmal, which is about 150 kms. from Sumerpur, as there is absence of proper means of communication and she needs a male companion for attending the hearing at Bhinmal. Mr. Purohit further contended that the respondent- husband, who is presently residing at Bhaiendar, District Thane (Maharashtra) has to take journey, either to Bhinmal or to Sumerpur to pursue the present cases. In view of these facts, Mr. Purohit contended that it would be proper, in the interest of justice and convenient to all concerned, if the matter (Divorce Petition No. 52/2014) is transferred to a competent Court at Sumerpur. 6. In the fact situation obtaining in the present case, I am of the considered view that, if the matter is transferred to Sumerpur from Bhinmal, it would be not only convenient to the petitioner- wife but also to the respondent-husband, who is already contesting a case filed by the petitioner-wife at Sumerpur. 7. 6. In the fact situation obtaining in the present case, I am of the considered view that, if the matter is transferred to Sumerpur from Bhinmal, it would be not only convenient to the petitioner- wife but also to the respondent-husband, who is already contesting a case filed by the petitioner-wife at Sumerpur. 7. My aforesaid views are fortified from the judgment rendered by this Court in the case of Smt. Vinita vs. Himanshu, AIR 2017 Rajasthan 102. 8. It will not be out of context to quote relevant excerpts from the judgment of Smt. Vinita vs. Himanshu (supra), wherein this Court has held as under:- "It is, therefore, felt imperative to examine and explore the necessary principles governing transfer applications, filed by families, entangled in forensic fights, while invoking powers conferred upon this Court by Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. According to this Court, the provisions of Section 24 of the Code provides a great deal of discretion in the court, however, such discretion is required to be exercised on the basis of sound principles. It is true that the discretionary power, more particularly, the jurisdiction in relation to transfer of cases, can not be imprisoned or bound within a straight jacket or cast- iron formula, uniformly applicable to all situations, yet the courts are required to be mindful of the fact that the power to transfer a case must be exercised with due care, caution and circumspection. Keeping in mind the provisions and mandate of Sections 24 and 25 of the Code, various judicial pronouncements have laid down broad propositions as to what may constitute a ground for transfer of a case. Generally speaking, they are, balance of convenience or inconvenience to the plaintiff or defendant or witnesses, convenience or inconvenience arising out of a particular place of trial, having regard to the nature of evidence or the points involved in the case; issues raised by the parties and reasonable apprehension in the mind of a litigant that he might not get justice in the court, where the proceedings are pending, or reasonable apprehension of failure of justice on the basis of a proven bias. These few factors are some of the aspects, germane in considering the question of transfer of a suit, appeal or other proceedings. These few factors are some of the aspects, germane in considering the question of transfer of a suit, appeal or other proceedings. It may be true that distance alone may not be decisive factor but it has its own role while considering the convenience of the parties, particularly, a wife. Court should focus on the convenience rather than redressal or mitigating against inconvenience. Convenience itself is a vital factor, to be reckoned-while deciding a Transfer Petition. Suffice it to say, that in the present case, it is not the distance alone for which this Court finds that it would be convenient for the petitioner-wife to defend the case in question at Bhilwara instead of Chittorgarh. There are other surrounding circumstances stated above, for which this Court feels it appropriate to transfer the case to the court at Bhilwara." 9. In view of the discussions aforesaid, the Case No. 52/2014 titled as Vinod Vaishnav vs. Smt. Uma, is withdrawn from the Additional District Judge, Bhinmal to be transferred to Additional District Judge, Sumerpur. 10. A copy of this order be sent to the respondent-husband, and both the Courts concerned for information and facilitating transmission of the record. 11. The Transfer Application is allowed, as indicated above.