' Mst. Kalsoom is wife of the respondent, Muhammad Hanif. She has made this petition for transfer of a suit for restitution of conjugal rights brought against her by the respondent. That suit is pending before Mr. Mushtaq Ahmed Sheikh, Judge, Family Court, Sheikhupura. On the other hand, the petitioner has filed a suit for dissolution of marriage, against the respondent, which is being heard by Mr. Javed Arshad Mir, Judge, Family Court, Lahore. The petitioner has prayed that the respondent's suit may be transferred to the said Court at Lahore.
2. In view of the nature of the two suits, common questions of law and fact are likely to arise therein.
Conflicting findings on such questions can be avoided if both the suits are heard and decided by one and the A same Court. Further, if the two suits are allowed to be heard by the Courts now seized of them, the petitioner will have to go to Sheikhupura to defend the suit brought by the respondent and the latter will have to visit Lahore to resist the suit instituted by the former. It is, therefore, my desire that one of the parties should be saved of the bother and expense to which she/he would be put for going to a places other than the place of her/his residence to contest the suit against! her/him. Which of the two parties should be helped in this regard is the question which now falls for consideration. Since the petitioner is a female but the respondent is a male, and the petitioner claims to be a Pardahnashin lady and apprehends trouble at the hands of the respondent in the event of her going to Sheikhupura to defend the suit brought against her, I feel that she deserves to be accommodated in preference to the respondent. Her suit is also earlier in time. I am, therefore, inclined to transfer the respondent's suit to Lahore.
3. It was contended by learned counsel for the respondent that the petitioner did not reside in the district of Lahore and, therefore, the Family Court at Lahore did not have territorial jurisdiction to try the suit instituted by her. Whether or not the petitioner ordinarily resides within the local limits of the Family Court at Lahore is a question of fact which, if raised before the said Court, will be judicially determined by it after recording the parties' evidence. I am of the opinion that it would not be proper for me to decide the question of jurisdiction in connection with the transfer application before me and in the absence of the parties' evidence. I did not call upon the parties to produce evidence nor this is the stage for so doing. Expression of any opinion by me on the issue of territorial jurisdiction is likely to influence the decision of the learned Family Court on that question. I would, therefore, not like to say anything in the matter while disposing of the petition in hand. The view taken by me is supported by the case reported as Mst. Irshad Bibi v. Bashir Ahmed PLD 1978 Lah.
518.
4. For the reasons enumerated earlier, it is a fit case for transfer of the respondent's suit from the aforementioned Court of Family Judge, D Sheikhupura, to that of the said Family Court at Lahore. 1, therefore, order accordingly. The parties are left to bear their own costs.