1986 PLP 890 (MLD)

Abdullah respondent has failed to attend the Court. His brother, Muhammad Yunus, however, is present and he is in possession of the registered post card issued by the office to the respondent for today's hearing. On the earlier occasion also, viz. 12‑12‑1983, Muhammad Yunus, the brother of the respondent attended the Court instead of the respondent himself and submitted that on account of having sustained injuries in an accident, the respondent was unable to attend the Court. On that occasion, the case was adjourned to a subsequent date at the request of Muhammad Yunus. No explanation has been given by Muhammad Yunus about the absence of Abdullah, today. In the circumstances, the respondent is proceeded against ex parte.

2. Through the present transfer application, Mst. Asia Bibi has sought transfer of the suit filed by the respondent against her in the Court of Judge Family Court, Gujranwala, or restitution of conjugal rights to the Court of Judge, Family Court, Nankana Sahib, District Sheikhupura, where petitioner's suit for dissolution of marriage against the respondent is pending.

3. It is alleged in the transfer application that both the parties i.e. the petitioner as also the respondent are residents of Nankana Teshil anti that only in order to cause annoyance and inconvenience to the petitioner‑‑a lady litigant, the respondent has filed suit for restitution of conjugal rights against the petitioner at Gujranwala instead of Nankana Sahib. A suit for maintenance filed by the petitioner against the respondent is also pending at Nankana Sahib. The contention that both the parties are permanent residents of Nankana tehsil has not been controverted. It has also been submitted on behalf of the petitioner that she being a 'Pardah Nasheen' lady cannot travel from Nankana Sahib to Gujranwala to defend the litigation in the form of suit for restitution of conjugal rights ‑instituted against her by the respondent. During the course of arguments, it has been disclosed on behalf of the petitioner that the witnesses cited by the respondent in the suit for restitution of conjugal rights mostly belong to Nankana Sahib tehsil. The petitioner has also expressed apprehension of foul‑play in the transfer application at the hands of the respondent.

4. In case of transfer applications arising out of family disputes preference has generally, to be given to the convenience of the lad litigant. In the light of the contentions contained in the unde consideration transfer application which have not been rebutted, it isl sufficiently established that it would be in the convenience of they petitioner‑‑a lady litigant, that the suit for restitution of conjugal rights tiled by the respondent against her at Gujranwala is transferred to the Court of the learned Judge, Family Court, Nan kana Sahib in whose Court petitioner's suit for dissolution of marriage against the respondent is also pending. ,

5. In view of the above, under consideration transfer application is allowed and the suit filed by the respondent against the petitioner for restitution of conjugal rights before the learned Judge, Family Court, Gujranwala, is hereby transferred to the Court of the learned Judge, Family Court, Nankana Sahib, District Sheikhupura in whose Court, the petitioner's suit for dissolution of marriage ‑.against th respondent is already pending. M.Y.H. Transfer granted