✦ Andhra Pradesh High Court · 25 Feb 2026

KUPPILI DEEPTHI v. KUPPILI THRINADH PRAVEEN KUMAR

F.C.O.P No. 427 of 2025VENUTHURUMALLI GOPALA, V GOPALA KRISHNA RAO4 min read

Case at a glance

Decided
25 Feb 2026
Bench
VENUTHURUMALLI GOPALA, V GOPALA KRISHNA RAO

Outcome

Allowed

In the result, the Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is allowed and

Key paragraphs

  • Para 88. In the result, the Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is allowed and the case in F.C.O.P.No.427 of 2025, on the file of the Additional Judge, Family Court, Visakhapatnam, is hereby withdrawn and transferred to the file of the Additional Judge, Family Court, Vijayawada. The learned…

Judgment

Cause title

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings in F.C.O.P No. 427 of 2025, on the file of the Additional Judge, Family Court, Visakhapatnam in the interest of Justice, Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. BANKA NAGESWARA RAO Counsel for the Respondent:

1. VADAPALLI RAMESH THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.GOPALA KRISHNA RAO TRANSFER CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.14 of 2026

ORDER:

The petitioner/wife filed the present petition under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, seeking transfer of F.C.O.P.No.427 of 2025, on the file of the Additional Judge, Family Court, Visakhapatnam, to the file of the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Nuzvid, Krishna District.

2.

The case of the petitioner is as follows: I. The petitioner is the legally wedded wife of the respondent and their marriage was performed on 01.02.2017, at Visakhapatnam, as per Hindu Rites and Caste Customs. During their wedlock, the petitioner/wife and the respondent/husband were blessed with two (02) children. Thereafter, due to the matrimonial disputes between the parties, the petitioner/wife along with her two children aged about 8 years and 4 years, has been residing separately and depending upon the mercy of her parents in Mylavaram Mandal, N.T.R. District. The petitioner/wife filed a Maintenance Case against respondent/husband vide M.C.No.16 of 2025 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Mylavaram, under Section 144(1) of B.N.S.S. Act, 2023, seeking maintenance from the respondent/husband, the same is pending for adjudication. II. The petitioner further pleaded that that to inconvenience and to harass her, respondent/husband a petition F.C.O.P.No.427 of 2025, on file of Additional Judge, Family Court, Visakhapatnam, under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, seeking for restitution of conjugal rights and the same is also pending for adjudication. III. The petitioner being a woman, has been residing separately along with her two (2) children aged about 8 years and 4 years and depending upon the mercy of her parents at Mylavaram, the distance between Mylavaram & Visakhapatnam is more than 350Kms and it is very difficult for her to travel to attend the restitution case proceedings filed by the respondent/husband before the Court at Visakhapatnam, without any male assistance and that she was constrained to file the present petition against the respondent/husband, seeking transfer of F.C.O.P.No.427 of 2025, on the file of the Additional Judge, Family Court, Visakhapatnam, to the file of the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Nuzvid, Krishna District.

3.

Heard Sri Banka Nageswara Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Vadapalli Ramesh, learned counsel for the respondent.

5.

Perused the material available on record. Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the respondent submitted that they have no objection to transfer the case in F.C.O.P.No.427 of 2025, which is pending before the Additional Judge, Family Court, Visakhapatnam, to the file of Additional Judge, Family Court, Vijayawada. He further submitted that he wants to file a Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition to transfer the Maintenance Case, filed by the petitioner herein vide M.C.No.16 of 2025, on the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Mylavaram, to any competent Court in Vijayawada.

6.

Learned counsel for the petitioner fairly conceded that they are not having any objection to transfer the said F.C.O.P.No.427of 2025, which is pending before the Additional Judge, Family Court, Visakhapatnam, to the file of Additional Judge, Family Court, Vijayawada, Krishna District.

7.

On considering the submissions made by learned counsel appearing on both sides, without going into merits or demerits in the present petition, this Court is inclined to allow the present Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition.

Operative part

8.

In the result, the Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is allowed and the case in F.C.O.P.No.427 of 2025, on the file of the Additional Judge, Family Court, Visakhapatnam, is hereby withdrawn and transferred to the file of the Additional Judge, Family Court, Vijayawada. The learned Additional Judge, Family Court, Visakhapatnam, shall transmit the entire case record in F.C.O.P.No.427 of 2025, to the file of the Additional Judge, Family Court, Vijayawada, 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. Both the parties are directed to appear before the learned Additional Judge, Family Court, Vijayawada, on 06.04.2026 at 10.30 a.m. 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: 25.02.2026 JLSR/CVD

Questions this judgment answers

What did the Court decide in this case?

The Court recorded the following disposition: In the result, the Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is allowed and

Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — ss. 24, 151; Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 — s. 144(1); Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — s. 9.

Which court decided this case, and when?

Andhra Pradesh High Court, on 25 Feb 2026. The bench was VENUTHURUMALLI GOPALA, V GOPALA KRISHNA RAO.

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.

This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Andhra Pradesh High Court or eCourts case status (search case no. F.C.O.P No. 427 of 2025). ← Search more judgments