JUDGMENT : 1. Heard learned Advocate Ms.Himanshi Balodi for the applicant and learned Advocate Mr.J. F. Mehta, who submits that he has instruction to appear on behalf of the respondent and he seeks permission to file his reply. Permission is granted. The reply filed by the respondent is taken on record. 2. Issue Rule returnable forthwith. Learned Advocate Mr.Mehta waives service of notice of Rule for the respondent. 3. By way of this application, the applicant prays for transfer of Family Suit No.1226 of 2022 from the learned Family Court, Ahmedabad to the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate’s Court, Rajpipla. 4. Learned Advocate Ms.Balodi for the applicant would submit that the parties had got married on 2.12.2020 and whereas later on, on account of certain differences, they are at present residing separately. Learned Advocate would submit that the applicant is a mother of a minor daughter, who is aged a little more than one year as of now. Learned Advocate would further submit that while the present respondent has preferred the present application being Family Suit No.1226 of 2022 for declaring the marriage as void under Section 12B and 12C of Hindu Marriage Act, on the other hand, the present applicant has preferred an application being Criminal Misc. Application No.97 of 2022 for grant of maintenance under Section 125 of Cr.P.C., pending before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rajpipla. Learned Advocate Ms.Balodi would submit that since the present respondent would be required to attend the said proceedings at Rajpipla, it would not cause any inconvenience to the respondent, if the Family Suit preferred by him is also transferred to Rajpipla and whereas it is submitted that on the other hand, more particularly considering the fact that the present applicant is an unemployed lady, mother of one year old child, it would cause grave inconvenience to the applicant to travel from Village Navapura, Taluka Nandod, District Narmada to Ahmedabad on every occasion for attending the Family Suit. Learned Advocate Ms.Balodi would, therefore, request that having regard to such circumstances, the present application may be allowed. 5. This application has been vehemently objected to by learned Advocate Mr.Mehta, who would submit that the parties had got married at Ahmedabad and whereas they had lived together at Ahmedabad, hence, the cause of action for filing of the Family Suit had arisen at Ahmedabad. 5. This application has been vehemently objected to by learned Advocate Mr.Mehta, who would submit that the parties had got married at Ahmedabad and whereas they had lived together at Ahmedabad, hence, the cause of action for filing of the Family Suit had arisen at Ahmedabad. Learned Advocate Mr.Mehta would submit that in this view of the matter, there is no requirement for transferring the Family Suit from the Family Court at Ahmedabad to the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate at Rajpipla. Learned Advocate Mr.Mehta would, therefore, request to this Court to reject the present application. Learned Advocate Mr.Mehta would further submit that the Court at Rajpipla, where the transfer is sought for would not be competent to decide the application preferred by the present respondent, more particularly since the Court at Rajpipla would be an inferior Court compared to the Family Court, more particularly, according to the learned Advocate Mr.Mehta, as per Section 7 of the Family Court Act, for the purpose of jurisdiction, since the Family Court is having the status of District Court and whereas the Court at Rajpipla being a Court of inferior jurisdiction, therefore, the application preferred by the respondent would not lie before such Court. 6. Having regard to such submissions, learned Advocate Mr.Mehta would also rely upon Section 24 of the Civil Procedure Code and would submit that the power under Section 24 of CPC does not empower this Court to transfer a case to a Court of inferior jurisdiction and hence, according to the learned Advocate Mr.Mehta, the application for transfer may not be considered by this Court. 7. Heard the learned Advocates for the parties, who have not submitted anything else. 8. In order to deal with the legal contention raised by the learned Advocate Mr.Mehta, it would be beneficial to refer to Section 7 and Section 8 of the Family Courts Act, which are reproduced herein below for benefit :- “7. 7. Heard the learned Advocates for the parties, who have not submitted anything else. 8. In order to deal with the legal contention raised by the learned Advocate Mr.Mehta, it would be beneficial to refer to Section 7 and Section 8 of the Family Courts Act, which are reproduced herein below for benefit :- “7. Jurisdiction.— (1) Subject to the other provisions of this Act, a Family Court shall— (a) have and exercise all the jurisdiction exercisable by any district court or any subordinate civil court under any law for the time being in force in respect of suits and proceedings of the nature referred to in the Explanation; and (b) be deemed, for the purposes of exercising such jurisdiction under such law, to be a district court or, as the case may be, such subordinate civil court for the area to which the jurisdiction of the Family Court extends. Explanation.—The suits and proceedings referred to in this sub-section are suits and proceedings of the following nature, namely:— (a) a suit or proceeding between the parties to a marriage for a decree of nullity of marriage (declaring the marriage to be null and void or, as the case may be, annulling the marriage) or restitution of conjugal rights or judicial separation or dissolution of marriage; (b) a suit or proceeding for a declaration as to the validity of a marriage or as to the matrimonial status of any person; (c) a suit or proceeding between the parties to a marriage with respect to the property of the parties or of either of them; (d) a suit or proceeding for an order or injunction in circumstance arising out of a marital relationship; (e) a suit or proceeding for a declaration as to the legitimacy of any person; (f) a suit or proceeding for maintenance; (g) a suit or proceeding in relation to the guardianship of the person or the custody of, or access to, any minor. (2) Subject to the other provisions of this Act, a Family Court shall also have and exercise— (a) the jurisdiction exercisable by a Magistrate of the first class under Chapter IX (relating to order for maintenance of wife, children and parents) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974); and (b) such other jurisdiction as may be conferred on it by any other enactment. 8. 8. Exclusion of jurisdiction and pending proceedings.—Where a Family Court has been established for any area,— (a) no district court or any subordinate civil court referred to in sub-section (1) of section 7 shall, in relation to such area, have or exercise any jurisdiction in respect of any suit or proceeding of the nature referred to in the Explanation to that sub-section; (b) no magistrate shall, in relation to such area, have or exercise any jurisdiction or powers under Chapter IX of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974); (c) every suit or proceeding of the nature referred to in the Explanation to subsection (1) of section 7 and every proceeding under Chapter IX of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974),— (i) which is pending immediately before the establishment of such Family Court before any district court or subordinate court referred to in that subsection or, as the case may be, before any magistrate under the said Code; and (ii) which would have been required to be instituted or taken before such Family Court if, before the date on which such suit or proceeding was instituted or taken, this Act had come into force and such Family Court had been established, shall stand transferred to such Family Court on the date on which it is established.” 9. Section 7 of the Family Courts Act with regard to jurisdiction states that the Family Court shall have and exercise all jurisdiction exercisable by any District Court or any subordinate Civil Court under any law for the time being in force. Section 8 states with regard to where a Family Court has been established, no District Court or any subordinate Civil Court referred to in Sub-section (1) of Section 7 i.e. referred to herein above shall have or exercise any jurisdiction in relation to such area, have or exercise any jurisdiction in respect of any suit or proceeding as referred to in the explanation below Sub-section (1) of Section 7. The proceeding of which transfer is sought for being under Section 12 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 is one of the suits referred to in the explanation to Sub-section (1) of Section 7 of the Family Courts’ Act, more particularly suit falling under Explanation (a). 9.1. The proceeding of which transfer is sought for being under Section 12 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 is one of the suits referred to in the explanation to Sub-section (1) of Section 7 of the Family Courts’ Act, more particularly suit falling under Explanation (a). 9.1. The position if both the Sections 7 and 8 are harmoniously read, would be that while a Family Court exercises its jurisdiction as exercisable by any District Court or any subordinate Civil Court and whereas upon establishment of a Family Court, the jurisdiction of a District Court or subordinate Civil Court is excluded with regard to suits or proceedings mentioned in the explanation and as a necessary corollary, if a Family Court has not been established for any area, then a District Court or subordinate Civil Court, as the case may be, are not precluded from exercising its jurisdiction in relation to suits or proceedings of the nature mentioned at explanation to Sub-section (1) of Section 7 of the Family Courts Act. 10. At this stage, since Section 3(b) and Section 19 of the Hindu Marriage Act would also be relevant for the present purpose, the same is reproduced herein below for benefit :- “3. Definitions.—In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires,— (a) xxx (b) “district court” means, in any area for which there is a city civil court, that court, and in any other area the principal civil court of original jurisdiction, and includes any other civil court which 1. The Act has been extended to Dadra and Nagar Haveli (w.e.f. 1-7-1965) by Reg. 6 of 1963, s. 2 and Schedule I and to Pondicherry (w.e.f 1-10-1963) with modifications by Reg. 7 of 1963, s. 3 and the Schedule I. 4 may be specified by the State Government, by notification in the Official Gazette, as having jurisdiction in respect of the matters dealt with in this Act;” “19. 6 of 1963, s. 2 and Schedule I and to Pondicherry (w.e.f 1-10-1963) with modifications by Reg. 7 of 1963, s. 3 and the Schedule I. 4 may be specified by the State Government, by notification in the Official Gazette, as having jurisdiction in respect of the matters dealt with in this Act;” “19. Court to which petition shall be presented.—Every petition under this Act shall be presented to the District Court within the local limits of whose ordinary original civil jurisdiction:— (i) the marriage was solemnized, or (ii) the respondent, at the time of the presentation of the petition, resides, or (iii) the parties to the marriage last resided together, or (iiia) in case the wife is the petitioner, where she is residing on the date of presentation of the petition; or (iv) the petitioner is residing at the time of the presentation of the petition, in a case where the respondent is at that time, residing outside the territories to which this Act extends, or has not been heard of as being alive for a period of seven years or more by those persons who would naturally have heard of him if he were alive.” 11. Section 19 of the Hindu Marriage Act states regarding the Court to which an petition shall be presented under the Act and whereas as per Section 19, such petition shall be presented to the District Court within the local limits of whose ordinary original civil jurisdiction the marriage was solemnized or the respondent, at the time of the presentation of the petition, resides so on and so forth. Section 3(b) of the Hindu Marriage Act defines ‘district court’ which means in any area for which there is a City Civil Court that Court, and in any other area the Principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction and would include any other Civil Court, which may be specified by the State Government by notification in the Official Gazette, as having jurisdiction in respect of the matters dealt with in this Act. 12. It appears that a learned Coordinate Bench of this Court (Coram: Ms. Justice Harsha Devani) in case of Amitbhai Hirabhai Vadodariya Vs. Pinalben Prafulbhai Mehta (First Appeal No.1819 of 2013 dt. 5.2.2014), considering an issue as regards appropriate forum to challenge an order passed by a Principal Sr. 12. It appears that a learned Coordinate Bench of this Court (Coram: Ms. Justice Harsha Devani) in case of Amitbhai Hirabhai Vadodariya Vs. Pinalben Prafulbhai Mehta (First Appeal No.1819 of 2013 dt. 5.2.2014), considering an issue as regards appropriate forum to challenge an order passed by a Principal Sr. Civil Judge, dismissing an application for divorce under Section 13(1)(iA) of the Hindu Marriage Act, had inter alia explained the definition of the term ‘district court’, more particularly in context of the Gujarat Civil Courts’ Act. Paragraph 17 insofar as relevant for the present purpose is reproduced herein below for benefit:- “17. Another aspect which may be noted is that under section 15 of the Gujarat Civil Courts Act, the forum of appeal is the Court of the District Judge and not the district court. Thus, there is a clear distinction between a “district court” as defined under section 3(b) of the Act and a “District Judge” as envisaged under section 4 of the Gujarat Civil Courts Act. The expression “district court” as defined under section 3(b) of the Act is an inclusive one and also includes the civil court and the principal civil court of original jurisdiction when notified by the Government. Therefore, though the court of the Principal Senior Civil Judge which is notified by the State Government as having jurisdiction in matters dealt with under the Hindu Marriage Act, is a “district court” within the meaning of the said expression as defined under section 3(b) of the Act, but it is not the principal civil court of original jurisdiction, nor does it exercise its jurisdiction as the principal civil court of original jurisdiction. ...” A perusal of the observations of the learned Coordinate Bench reveals that the term ‘district court’ would also include a Civil Court and a Principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction when notified by the Government. 13. Insofar as the notification by the Government referred to in Section 3(b) of the Hindu Marriage Act, it appears that the Government of Bombay vide notification published in Government Gazette on 8.9.1955 has inter alia conferred upon the Courts of Civil Judges the jurisdiction to deal with matters under Hindu Marriage Act. The said notification is reproduced herein below for benefit:- “Sachivalaya, Bombay, 1st September 1955 Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The said notification is reproduced herein below for benefit:- “Sachivalaya, Bombay, 1st September 1955 Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. No.HMA.1055/52067.- In exercise of the powers conferred by clause (b) of section 3 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (XXV of 1955), the Government of Bombay hereby specifies the Courts of Civil Judges (Senior Division) in this State as having jurisdiction in respect of the matters dealt with in the said Act within their respective jurisdictions. By order and in the name of the Governor of Bombay R. G. Salvi, Deputy Secretary to Government.” 14. Since Section 88 and Section 89 of the Bombay Reorganization Act would also be required to be appreciated, the same is reproduced herein below for benefit :- “88. Power to adapt laws.—For the purpose of facilitating the application in relation to the State of Maharashtra or Gujarat of any law made before the appointed day, the appropriate Government may, before the expiration of one year from that day, by order, make such adaptations and modifications of the law, whether by way of repeal or amendment, as may be necessary or expedient, and thereupon every such law shall have effect subject to the adaptations and modifications so made until altered, repealed or amended by a competent Legislature or other competent authority. Explanation.—In this section, the expression “appropriate Government” means as respects any law relating to a matter enumerated in the Union List, the Central Government, and as respects any other law, the State Government. 89. Power to construe laws.—Notwithstanding that no provision or insufficient provision has been made under section 88 for the adaptation of a law made before the appointed day, any court, tribunal or authority, required or empowered to enforce such law may, for the purpose of facilitating its application in relation to the State of Maharashtra or Gujarat, construe the law in such manner, without affecting the substance, as may be necessary or proper in regard to the matter before the court, tribunal or authority.” 15. The Bombay Reorganization Act had been promulgated to provide for reorganization of State of Bombay to form new States i.e. State of Gujarat and State of Maharashtra. The Bombay Reorganization Act had been promulgated to provide for reorganization of State of Bombay to form new States i.e. State of Gujarat and State of Maharashtra. Section 88 of the said Act inter alia envisages with regard to power to adapt laws and whereas the said section states that for the purpose of facilitating of application of any law either in the State of Maharashtra or Gujarat the appropriate Government is empowered to make such adaption and modification, as may be necessary with regard to any law, which was made before the appointed date. Section 89 inter alia refers to the power to construe laws and whereas Section 89 states that in spite of there being no provision or exception provision made under Section 88 for adaption of a law made before the appointed date any Court required and empowered to enforce such law for the purpose of facilitating its application in relation to the newly created State can construe the same in such manner without affecting the substance , as may be necessary or proper in regard to the matter before the Court. 15.1. In this regard, while it appears that the State of Bombay had notified that the Civil Courts would have jurisdiction in respect of matters to be dealt with under Hindu Marriage Act, in exercise of power under Section 3(b) of Hindu Marriage Act and whereas while it appears that the Gujarat State has not adapted such notification for facilitating the application of the Hindu Law, yet by virtue of the power under Section 89, this Court is empowered to construe the said notification as published by the State of Bombay as being applicable over the State of Gujarat also. 16. Having regard to the above discussion, since it appears that the District Court of the Principal Sr. Civil Judge or a Civil Court would be precluded from exercising jurisdiction as available to a Family Court under Family Courts’ Act, if a Family Court is established in the area, in absence of the same, the converse proposition i.e. the District Court or any subordinate Civil Court would have jurisdiction over all suits as stated in the explanation to Section 7(1) of the Family Courts Act would hold good. Furthermore, while Section 19 of the Hindu Marriage Act envisages for suits under the said Act be presented before a District Court, Section 3(b) of the Hindu Marriage Act which defines the term ‘district court’ inter alia envisages a Principal Civil Court and would include any other Civil Court, which may be specified by the State Government. Furthermore, the notification published by the State of Bombay being considered from the context of the powers available under Section 89 of the Bombay Reorganization Act would be deemed to be applicable in the State of Gujarat also. The position, thus, would be that in an area where there is no Family Court established and which area also does not have a City Civil Court, then it would be the Principal Civil Court or any other Civil Court which could exercise jurisdiction in proceedings filed under the Hindu Marriage Act. There being no City Civil Court or Family Court established in the District of Narmada, as a natural corollary, the Principal Sr. Civil Judge or any Civil Court as specified would be empowered to exercise jurisdiction. Furthermore, in view of the explanation of definition under Section 3(b) as provided by this Court in case of Amitbhai Hirabhai Vadodariya (supra), the term ‘district court’ and the term ‘Principal District Judge’ not being one and the same and the term ‘district court’ under Section 3(b) also held to be including a Civil Court including the Principal Sr. Civil Judge, therefore, the argument of the learned Advocate Mr.Mehta for the respondent that the Court where transfer is sought for at Rajpipla being a Court of inferior jurisdiction does not hold any water and such contention is rejected. 17. Insofar as the principal aspect on merit is concerned, as to whether a transfer would be granted as per the request of the applicant, it requires to be mentioned that the applicant appears to be an unemployed lady having a minor child of around 1½ years. Further, the distance between the place of residence of the applicant and the Family Court also appears to be around 200 kms. The aforesaid factual position, tilts the balance in favour of the applicant. At this stage, this Court seeks to rely upon the observations of the Hon’ble Apex Court in case of N.C.V. Aishwarya Vs. Further, the distance between the place of residence of the applicant and the Family Court also appears to be around 200 kms. The aforesaid factual position, tilts the balance in favour of the applicant. At this stage, this Court seeks to rely upon the observations of the Hon’ble Apex Court in case of N.C.V. Aishwarya Vs. A. S. Saravana Karthik Sha, reported in 2022 SCC Online SC 1199, more particularly paragraph 9 thereof being relevant for the present purpose is quoted herein below for benefit:- “9. The cardinal principle for exercise of power under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure is that the ends of justice should demand the transfer of the suit, appeal or other proceeding. In matrimonial matters, wherever Courts are called upon to consider the plea of transfer, the Courts have to take into consideration the economic soundness of both the parties, the social strata of the spouses and their behavioural pattern, their standard of life prior to the marriage and subsequent thereto and the circumstances of both the parties in eking out their livelihood and under whose protective umbrella they are seeking their sustenance to life. Given the prevailing socio- economic paradigm in the Indian society, generally, it is the wife’s convenience which must be looked at while considering transfer.” 18. Considering the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court, more particularly since it is the wife’s convenience which takes primacy over any inconvenience which may be caused to the husband, in the considered opinion of this Court, the application deserves consideration. 19. The Family Suit No.1226 of 2022 pending before the learned Family Court, Ahmedabad is directed to be transferred to a Court of competent jurisdiction at Rajpipla, District Narmada. The Court concerned, after receiving the papers of Family Suit No.1226 of 2022 shall, after affording appropriate opportunity to the parties, take appropriate decision in accordance with law. 20. With these observations and directions, the present application stands disposed of as allowed. Direct service is permitted.