The High Court · 2025

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 H tM O P No.31 of 2021 before the Court of the Senior Civil Judge at Mahabubabad. pending the disposal of tfle transfer petition. Counsel for the Petitioner : Sri Mandapati Bala Krishna representing Sri. Muthyala Praveen, Advocate Counsel for the Respondent The Court made the following: HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY Tr.C.M. P.No.19 ot2025 ORDER: This Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed seeking hansfer of H.M.O'P'N o'37 of 2}21from the file of the Senior Civil Judge at Mahabubabad, filed by the respondent-husband' to the Court of the Principal Senior Civil Judge-cum- Assistant Sessions judge, Bhadradri Kotha gudem' Heard Sri Mandapati Bala Krishna' Iearned counsel 2. appearing on behalf of Sri Muthyala Praveen' learneci counsel for the petitioner. 3. The brief facts leading to filing of the present l'r'C M P' are that the marriage of the petitioner-wife was solemnizecl with the 18.06.201,4 at Ambica Function Hall' respondent-husband on Palavancha, Bhadrac'lri Kothagudem Peddammathalli TemPIe District as Per the prevailing customs in Hindu Religion' Respondent already had a girl child from his first marriage and petitioner is second wife to the responclent Aftcr marriage' petitioner joined the company of the responclent ancl lived in matrimonial house for a period of two ycars On 24'05 2015' she gave birth to a male child' thereafter' responclent started to 2 LNA, J Tr.CMP.No.l9 of2025 demand an additional dowry of Rs.4,00,00O/- to take the petitioner back into conjugal life

4. As the petitioner's Parents are Poor and cannot bare the maintenance of the petitioner and her child, she file M.C.No.15 of 2018 before Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Bhadrachalam and the Court vide order dated 07.11.2019, directed the respondent to pay monitory maintenance of Rs.4000/- to the petitioner and her child. l,ater, respondent filed t{.M.O.P.No.3t of 2021, seeking divorce before Senior Civil Judge, Mahabubabad and the same was decreed as exparte vide orcler dated 27-04-2023. Thereafter, petitioner filed I.A.No.234 of 2023 in H.M.O.P.No.3'[- ol 202'l', seeking to set aside the exparte divorce decree, and the same was allowed by the Senior Civil Juclgc, Mahabubabad.

5. It is further stated that the petitioner is residing in Sarapaka village, Burgampadu Mandal, Bhaclradri Kothagudem District which is 100 kms away from Senior Civil Judge, at Mahabubabad and there is only one bus that commutes between the petitioner's village and Mahabubabad. fherefore, it is very difficult for the petitioner to travel such a long distance on each and every I j l 1 I I l I I l i I i t I i I I I t I I I t I I I i/// 3 LNA, J Tr.CMP..\o. )9 of 2025 --l hearing. Petitioner is dependent on her parents and her parents are not in a position to support her financially. Hence, filed this Tr.Cmp., seeking transfer of the said H.M.O.P

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the respondent has fi-Ied the said H.M.O.P. in Mahabubabad, as he stayed there for a short period of time, but is now residing in Hyderabad. However, respondent should travel from Hyderabad to Kothagudem, Bhadradri Kothagudem District, for attending the H.M.O.P. Learned counsel further submitted that, as the petitioner has a child to take care of her child and also neecl to attend her ailing parents, it is very difficult for her to rravcl from Mahabubabad to Bhadradri Kothagudem. Therefore, prayec{ to rransfer the H.M.O.P.No.3'1, of 2021, filed by the responclent to rhe Bhac{radri Kothagudem Court. Leamed counsel for the petitioner further contended that in the transfer proceedings of matrirnonial c1ispy1g5, the convenience of the wife has to be consrrlt recl ancl therefore, the request of the petitioner-wife neerls to be con\idered ! I I t I t : d i t t { t : i : I i I i I I I l q q i , r $ I 4 rr cMP No t9 o12025 LNA, J

7. ln support of the said contentions, the Ieamed counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in NCV Aishtoarya Vs A.S.Sataoana Karthik Shal held as follows: "9. The cardinal pinciple for exercise of potoer under Section 24 of the Code of Citsil Procedute is that tfu etds Ltf lustice should demand the transfer of the suit, appeal or other proceeding. ln matrimoni-al matters, wherexer Courts are calLed upon to considet tfu pba of *ansfer, thc Courts haoe to take iuto consideration the economic soundness of both the pnrties, the social stratn of the spouses and thzir behnaioural pattern, tluir stnndard of lfe pnor to the marriage and subsequent thereto and tle circumstnnces of both thc parties in eking out thtir litelihood nnrl uttder tdnse protectiae umbrella they are seeking tlrcir e$llll tkt ttt liie. Gioen thz preoailing socio- economic pnradigttt ut tlu' lnLluut sttciety, generalLy, it is the wife's anaenience tltich ntrst ht: lottkad nt uliLe considering transfer."

8. The principle of law laid dow'n by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in N.C.V.Aishzaary4's cdse (2"d cited supra), has been reiterated by the High Court o[ Bombay in Deaika Dhitaj Patil I 2022 SCC online sc 1199 5 LNA, J Tr CMP No l9 of2025 Nee Deaika layprakash Buttepatil o. Dhirai Sunil Patil2, and observed as under:- "In a country like lndi.a, imPottant decisions such as marriage, diaorce are shll taken with the gtidance and blessings of elderc in the family. For a lady to traoel alone for the proeedings to a Coutt where the fate of lu,r mnrriage is going to be decided without any family menfuer toould defnitely be a matter of ancem and ctusa not only physical inconaenience but also r t trol onal and psychological inconoenience 9 Further, the High Court of Bombay in Priyanka RahuL Patil a. Rahul Raoindra Patip followed the principle laid down in N.C.V.Aishtoarya's case (2na cited suPra) and Deoika Dhirai Patil Nee Deuika layprakash Buttepatil's case (3rd cited supra), and helcl as follows:- "Tlrc undtrlying principle goaerning the proceedings under sr(tn ol the CPC, is that conaenience of the ruife is to bL' prefarreLT ouer the conuenience of the husband."

10. Thus, there are catena of decisions of the Hon'blc Supreme Court and other High Courts to the effect that in matrimonial matters/ disputes, while considering the application '-(2023 SCC Onlrne Bom 1926) 'i20?3 SCC Online Bom 1982) 6 LNA, J TT.CMP.No.I9 of2025 for transfer of the proceedings from one Court to another Court' the Courts must Prefer the convenience of the wife over the convenience of the husband.

11. ln the present, case, a Perusal of the record discloses that the petitioner is seeking hansfer of the H M'O'P filed by the respondent from the Senior Civil Judge' at Mahabubabad to Principal Senior Civil Judge-cum- Assistant Sessions Judge' Bhadradri Kothagudem, on the ground that she is a homemaker and she is dependent upon her Parents and therefore' it is difficult for her to travel from Mahabubabad to Bhadradri Kothag-udem, on every date of adlournment' Further' for every hearing, she has to take assistance from her farnill' members' However, as respondent is now residing irr I lvdcrabact' he can traveltoBhadradriKothagudeminstcacloftravelingto Mahabubabad. T2. Therefore, in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the light of the principle laid down in the aforesaid decisions' this i t i I I I I I I I 7 LttA, J TT.CMP No.19 of 2025 Court is inclined to accede to the request of the petitioner-wife seeking transfer of the case

13. Accordingly, this Transfer C.M.P. is allowed and H.M.O.P.No.37 of 2027 pending on the file of Senior Civil fudge at Mahabubabad, is withdrawn and transferred to the file of the Principal Scnior Civil Judge-cum- Assistant Sessions Judge, Bhadradri Kothagudem, for disposal in accordance with law.

14. The learned Senior Civil Judge at Mahabubabad, shall kansmit the entire original record in H.M.O.P.No.31. of 2021. duJy indexed, to the Court of the Principal Senior Civil Judge-cum- Assistant Sessions Judge, Bhadradri Kothagudem, preferably r'r,ithin a period of onc month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order

15. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs. SD/. A.SREENIVASA REDDY ISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1 2 3 4 lgLD h The Senior Civil Judge at Mahabubabad. The Principal Senior Civil Judge cum Assistant Sessions Judge, Bhadradri Kothagudem 9n" 99 to Sri lMuthyala praveen, Advocate tOpUC] Two CD Copies 4r' /.' \) S ia Is j J t 6( z a 1{ AUB 2t6 oEg PATC Heo * HIGH COURT DATED:1710212025 ORDER TRCMP.No,19 ot 2O25 7 ,/ /( 4 -/ ) /.( t / ALLOWING THE Tr.C.M.P.