GUL ZARIN KIANI, J.- This is a combined petition for transfer of three somewhat connected matters from the courts at Lahore for their trial by courts of competent jurisdiction at Sialkot. The disputes were between wife and husband.
2. Petitioner was married to respondent on 4.3.1992. She belonged to Sialkot City. Her husband who was respondent in the case was resident of Lahore City. They were married at Sialkot. On 22.1.1993, a female child namely Kiran Haroon was born to them from this marriage. Her birth took-place at Sialkot. Before it, the spouses had fallen out and the petitioner had left for Sialkot. She filed a suit for divorce against the respondent in a family court at Sialkot. Respondent instituted a suit for restitution of conjugal rights against her in a family court at Lahore. On a petition for transfer-TA.
No. 451/93, on 25.10.1993, I had transferred the suit for restitution of conjugal rights from Lahore to Sialkot. This did not end the matter. Respondent had instituted two separate civil suits for recovery of Rs. 23450/- and Rs. 24000/- against the petitioner in the civil courts at Lahore. He had also instituted a petition under Section 25 of the Guardians-& Wards Act for custody of the minor daughter in the court at Lahore. In all the above three matters, petitioner was served and had filed her written statement. Issues in the cases were settled and the trial of these matters was at the evidence stage. Petitioner has applied for transfer of these matters for their trial by a court of competent jurisdiction at Sialkot. This was near her residence and was conducive to her convenience and that of the minor child. Respondent resisted the petition and posed a question of hazard to his security at Sialkot. It was asserted that on some occasion, he was assaulted by the petitioner's side.
3. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and also the respondent at length. As observed elsewhere, petitioner belonged to Sialkot and the minor child was also resident of the same place.
Metrimonial suits between the parties were already being tried by a family court at Sialkot.
Respondent was conveniently attending the trial of metrimonial suits at the aforesaid place. It was the case of the petitioner that the money suits and the petition for guardianship were filed at Lahore for causing harassm ent to her and it was extremely inconvenient for her to attend the proceedings in them at Lahore. She was already deserted by respondent and had. No means to bear the expenses of litigation at Lahore. Furthermore, constant travel between Sialkot and Lahore not only caused inconvenience but was productive of security risk for her and her daughter.
4. Having considered respective merits of contentions advanced by the rival parties, in my opinion, a sufficient ground was made out for ordering transfer of above two civil suits and the petition for guardianship from the courts at Lahore for their trial by the court or courts of competent jurisdiction at Sialkot. This shall not only reduce apprehended inconvenience to the petitioner but shall also conducive to fair administration of justice between the parties. I was conscious of the argument touching on inconvenience of the respondent for attending the trial of suits at Sialkot but in the ultimate analysis, the convenience of female litigant and the minor child must prevail. Upon this view, I would accept the petition and direct transfer of the two civil suits and the petition for guardianship from Lahore to the file of learned Senior Civil Judge, Sialkot for their trial by him or by any other Civil Judge in the District to whom their trial may be entrusted by him. Records received from the courts at Lahore shall be transferred to the transferee court at Sialkot.