respondent/ wife was allegedly necked out from her matrimonial house demanding additional dowry. Thereafter, she went to her parents house at Khammam and starting residing there. She filed three cases, i.e., a criminal case, a maintenance case and a domestic violence case against the petitioner/ husband in the Courts at Khammam, besides filing the subject FCOP for divorce. The learned counsel for the respondent/ wife would submit that the petitioner/ husband is regularly attending the proceedings in the aforementioned three cases filed against him in the Courts at Khammam. Even if the subject FCOP is transferred from the Family Court, Khammam to a Court at Hyderabad as requested by the petitioner/ husband, no useful purpose would be served, since he has to attend the proceedings in the other three cases pending against him in the Courts at Khammam. The main ground urged by the petitioner/ husband for transfer of the subject FCOP to a Court at Hyderabad is that it will be difficult for him to undertake travel from Bangalore to Khammam, i.e., about 758 kilometres and that he has to undertake the said travel in two spells, i.e., from Bangalore to Hyderabad and from Hyderabad to Khammam. It cannot be a ground to grant the relief claimed by the petitioner/ husband. Here, it is relevant to state that Section 19 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, has been amended in the year 2003, by insertion of proviso (iii)(a). The amended Section 19(iii)(a) of the Act gives special preference to the wife to file a petition and prosecute the same, before the Court within whose jurisdiction she resides. Law is well settled that in the cases of transfer of matrimonial disputes from one Court to another, convenience of the
