[ad_1]
Andhra Pradesh High Court – Amravati
Erragudi Bhargavi vs Menega Naveen Kumar on 30 April, 2025
APHC010097622025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3397]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY ,THE THIRTIETH DAY OF APRIL
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENUTHURUMALLI GOPALA
KRISHNA RAO
TRANS. CIVIL MISC.PETITION NO: 64/2025
Between:
Erragudi Bhargavi ...PETITIONER
AND
Menega Naveen Kumar ...RESPONDENT
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. Nandipalle Venkatesh
Counsel for the Respondent:
1.
The Court made the following:
ORDER:
The petitioner/wife herein filed the present petition under Section 24 of
the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, (for short „the C.P.C.‟) seeking to withdraw
the F.C.O.P.No.185 of 2024 on the file of the Judge, Family Court, Kadapa,
Y.S.R. District and transfer the same to the Senior Civil Judge, Dhone,
Kurnool District, for trial.
2. The case of the petitioner in brief is as follows:
I. The petitioner is the legally wedded wife of the respondent and the
marriage of the petitioner with the respondent was solemnized on
06.05.2022, at Sri Sapthagiri Kalyana Mandapam, Kadapa, as per the
Hindu Rites and Caste Customs. During their wedlock period, the
petitioner and the respondent were blessed with a male child. After that,
due to the matrimonial disputes between both the spouses, the
petitioner/wife has been residing separately along with her child aged
about 3 years at her parents‟ house at Bethamcherla Town, Kurnool
District. In view of the harassment made by the respondent/husband,
the petitioner/wife lodged a complaint against the respondent/husband
and his family members dated 19.01.2024, in F.I.R.No.12 of 2024,
under Sections 498-A, 506 r/w Section 34 of I.P.C. and under Sections
3 & 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, before the Bethamcherla
Police Station. After completion of investigation, Police filed a charge
sheet and the same was numbered as vide C.C.No.240 of 2024 on the
file of the II Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Dhone, Kurnool
District, the same is pending for adjudication.
II. The petitioner/wife further pleaded that to cause unnecessary
inconvenience to her, the respondent/husband had filed
F.C.O.P.No.185 of 2024 on the file of the Judge, Family Court, Kadapa,
Y.S.R. District, under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955,
seeking dissolution of the marriage and the same is also pending for
adjudication.
III. The petitioner/wife further pleaded that, she being a woman, residing
separately along with her child aged about 3 years at her parent‟ house at
Bethamcherla Town, Kurnool District, it is very difficult for her to travel at a
distance of more than 170 Kms from Bethamcherla Town to Kadapa to
attend the divorce case proceedings on each and every adjournment
without any male support and that she is constrained to file the present
petition seeking to withdraw the F.C.O.P.No.185 of 2024 on the file of the
Judge, Family Court, Kadapa, Y.S.R. District and transfer the same to the
Senior Civil Judge, Dhone, Kurnool District.
3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
4. Though the notice sent to the respondent through Registered Post and
the same was served on him, none appeared for the respondent. Therefore,
„service held sufficient‟.
5. Perused the material available on record.
6. The material on record prima facie goes to show that, due to the
matrimonial disputes between both the spouses, the petitioner/wife has been
residing separately at her parents‟ house along with her child aged about 3
years at Bethamcherla Town, Kurnool District and she also filed a case i.e.,
C.C.No.240 of 2024 on the file of the II Additional Judicial Magistrate of First
Class, Dhone, Kurnool District, the same is pending for adjudication.
The material on record further reveals that the respondent/husband has also
instituted a case i.e., F.C.O.P.No.185 of 2024 on the file of the Judge, Family
Court, Kadapa, Y.S.R. District, under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage
Act, 1955, seeking dissolution of the marriage and the same is also pending
for adjudication.
7. The Apex Court in a case of GEETA HEERA Vs HARISH CHANDER
HEERA1, held by considering the fact that “if a wife does not have sufficient
funds to visit the place where the divorce petition is filed by her husband, then
the transfer petition filed by the wife may be allowed.”
8. The Apex Court in a case of N.C.V. AISHWARYA VS A.S. SARAVANA
KARTHIK SHA2, held as follows:
“9. The cardinal principles for exercise of power under Section 24 of
the Code of Civil Procedure is that the ends of justice should demand
the transfer of the suit, appeal or other proceeding. In matrimonial
matters, wherever Courts are called upon to consider the plea of
transfer, the Courts have to take into consideration the economic
soundness of both the parties, the social strata of the spouses and their
behavioural pattern, their standard of life prior to the marriage and
subsequent thereto and the circumstances of both the parties in eking
out their livelihood and under whose protective umbrella they are
seeking their sustenance to life. Given the prevailing socio- economic
paradigm in the Indian society, generally, it is the wife’s convenience
which must be looked at while considering transfer.”
1
(2000) 10 SCC 304
2
2022 LiveLaw (SC) 627
9. On considering the submissions made by the learned counsel
appearing for the petitioner and in view of the ratio laid down by the aforesaid
case laws and on considering the facts and circumstances of the present case
that in matrimonial proceedings, the convenience of the wife has to be taken
into consideration than that of the inconvenience of the husband. Therefore,
I am of the considered view that there are justifiable grounds to consider the
request made by the petitioner/wife, seeking to withdraw the F.C.O.P.No.185
of 2024 on the file of the Judge, Family Court, Kadapa, Y.S.R. District and
transfer the same to the Senior Civil Judge, Dhone, Kurnool District.
10. In the result, the Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is allowed and
F.C.O.P.No.185 of 2024 on the file of the Judge, Family Court, Kadapa,
Y.S.R. District, is hereby withdrawn and transferred to the Senior Civil Judge,
Dhone, Kurnool District. The learned Judge, Family Court, Kadapa, Y.S.R.
District, shall transmit the case record in F.C.O.P.No.185 of 2024, to the
Senior Civil Judge, Dhone, Kurnool District, duly indexed as expeditiously as
possible preferably within a period of two (02) weeks from the date of receipt
of a copy of the order. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending and the Interim
order granted earlier, if any, shall stand closed.
_______________________________
JUSTICE V. GOPALA KRISHNA RAO
Date: 28.04.2025
CVD
[ad_2]
Source link