' MUHAMMAD MUZAMMAL KHAN, J.---This order proposes to decide instant transfer application, as well as, the other transfer application (T.A. No,84-C of 2004) filed by Mst. Uzma Rani, wife of the respondent, as both these petitions raise common questions of law and facts and are inter same parties, seeking transfer of two suits one for Restitution of Conjugal Rights, filed by the respondent, pending before the learned Judge, Family Court at Mailsi and the other is petition under section 25 of the Guardians and Wards Act, for custody of the petitioners filed by the respondent and awaits decision before Mr. Shahbaz Bhutta, Family Judge at Mailsi.
2. Precisely, relevant facts are that the respondent Syed Ibrar Hussain entered into a tie of marriage with Mst. Uzma Rani and this wedlock gave birth to three children who are the petitioners in the petition in hand. Relations between the spouses became strained out of which, the respondent filed two cases one for restitution of conjugal rights and the other for custody of the petitioners (his minor children) before the learned Judge, Family Court at Mailsi (Mr. Shahbaz Bhutta), whereas the petitioner filed a suit for recovery of maintenance allowance from their father/respondent and their mother Mst. Uzma Rani filed a suit for dissolution of marriage before the learned Judge, Family Court at Pakpattan Sharif. The petitioners pray that both the suits before the learned Judge, Family Court at Mailsi may be transferred at Pakpattan Sharif and a similar prayer is made by Mst. Uzma Rani, requesting transfer of suit for restitution of conjugal rights to any Judge, Family Court at Pakpattan Sharif. Notice issued to the respondent was served through process server of learned Senior Civil Judge, Vehari, regarding fixation of case for today. Notice under the registered postal cover was also issued to the learned counsel for the petitioners but in spite of repeated calls, nobody has turned up to appear in this case on behalf of either of the parties. Since a small matter of transfer of cases is involved, I myself sorted out the facts from the petition and propose to decide both these petitions, after proceeding against the respondent ex parte.
3. The petitioners in T.A. No,83-C of 2004 are minors and claimed themselves to be living at Pakpattan Sharif along with their mother who is a permanent resident of this place. The petitioner in T.A. No,84-C of 2004 is wife of the respondent who is pursuing not only the case against her but also the case against her minor children. They have levelled an allegation against the respondent that he is a well-knit person having relations with high-ups of the area including police department and political elites. In view of position enjoyed by the respondent, they apprehend that they will face tuff time at Mailsi where the respondent has filed two suits. The petitioners in both these petitions are weaker vessels and besides incurring of travelling expenses, it is hard for them to undertake journey of about 6 hours on each . Date of hearing. Even ignoring the relations of respondent with certain local officials, as claimed by the petitioners, it appears more convenient that all the cases between the parties be tried and decided by one Court, at the one place in order to avoid conflict of judgments. Law regarding transfer of cases is settled by this time whereunder convenience of females and minors is to be taken care of , as compared to a male, like the respondent. Keeping in view travel by a female along with three minor children, alone and for the reasons noted above, I accept both the transfer applications and order transfer of both the cases, one for custody titled "Syed Ibrar Hussain v. Mst. Uzma Rani" pending in the Court of Mr. Shahbaz Bhutta, Judge Family Court and the other suit for restitution of conjugal rights pending in the Court of Rao Naveed, Judge, Family Court, Mailsi to the Court of Mr. Muhammad Usman, Judge, Family Court, Pakpattan Sharif where maintenance suit by the petitioners, is already pending. There will be no order as to costs.