Andhra Pradesh High Court – Amravati
Gowrisetti Swathi Chennamsetti … vs Gowrisetti Mahesh Babu on 16 June, 2025
APHC010042282025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3397]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
MONDAY ,THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF JUNE
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENUTHURUMALLI GOPALA
KRISHNA RAO
TRANS. CIVIL MISC.PETITION NO: 33/2025
Between:
Gowrisetti Swathi @ Chennamsetti Swathi, ...PETITIONER
AND
Gowrisetti Mahesh Babu ...RESPONDENT
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. DEVARAM SRIHARI
Counsel for the Respondent:
1. SOMPAKA SHARAT BABU
The Court made the following:
ORDER:
Today, when the matter has been taken up for hearing, learned counsel for
the petitioner represented that the notice was sent to the respondent and the
respondent personally received the notice. The same is placed on record. None
appeared for the respondent. Therefore, „service held sufficient‟.
2. 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 transfer of
F.C.O.P.No.1162 of 2023 on the file of the Principal Family Court Judge,
Vijayawada, to the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Machilpatnam, Krishna District,
for trial.
3. 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
09.05.2018, at Chinna Tirupathi Devasthanam (Dwaraka Tirumala) West
Godavari District, as per the Hindu Rites and Caste Customs. During their
wedlock period, the petitioner/wife and the respondent/husband 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 male child aged about five (5) years at her parents‟ house at
Chevendra Village, Vadlamannadu Post, Pedana Mandal, Krishna District.
In view of the harassment made by the respondent/husband, the
petitioner/wife lodged a complaint against the respondent/husband, for the
offence punishable under Section 498-A I.P.C before the Pedana Police
Station. After completion of investigation, it has been numbered as vide
C.C.No.18 of 2024 on the file of the Excise Magistrate Court,
Machilipatnam and she also filed a Maintenance Case vide M.C.No.12 of
2021 on the file of the Special Mobile Magistrate Court, Machilipatnam,
Krishna District, the same are 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.1162
of 2023 on the file of the Principal Family Court Judge, Vijayawada, under
Section 13(1)(ia)(ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, seeking for
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 five (5) years at her parents‟ house
at Chevendra Village, it is very difficult for her to travel at a distance of more
than 70Kms from Chevendra Village to Vijayawada to attend the divorce case
proceedings on each and every adjournment without any male assistance and
that she is constrained to file the present petition seeking transfer of
F.C.O.P.No.1162 of 2023 on the file of the Principal Family Court Judge,
Vijayawada, to the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Machilpatnam, Krishna
District.
4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
5. Though the notice sent to the respondent was served on him, none
appeared for the respondent. Therefore, „service held sufficient‟.
6. Perused the material available on record.
7. 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 along with her child aged about five (5) years at her parents‟
house at Chevendra Village, Pedana Mandal, Krishna District and she filed two
(2) cases against the respondent/husband herein i.e., C.C.No.18 of 2024 on the
file of the Excise Magistrate Court, Machilipatnam and also Maintenance Case
vide M.C.No.12 of 2021 on the file of the Special Mobile Magistrate Court,
Machilipatnam, the same are pending for adjudication before the competent
Courts at Machilipatnam. The material on record further reveals that the
respondent/husband has also instituted a case i.e., F.C.O.P.No.1162 of 2023 on
the file of the Principal Family Court Judge, Vijayawada, under Section
13(1)(ia)(ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, seeking for dissolution of the
marriage and the same is also pending for adjudication.
8. 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.”
9. 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
10. 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 transfer of seeking transfer of
F.C.O.P.No.1162 of 2023 on the file of the Principal Family Court Judge,
Vijayawada, to the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Machilipatnam, Krishna District.
11. In the result, the Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is allowed and the
F.C.O.P.No.1162 of 2023 on the file of the Principal Family Court Judge,
Vijayawada, is hereby withdrawn and transferred to the Principal Senior Civil
Judge, Machilipatnam, Krishna District. The learned Principal Family Court
Judge, Vijayawada, shall transmit the case record in F.C.O.P.No.1162 of 2023, to
the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Machilipatnam, Krishna 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: 16.06.2025
CVD