The High Court · 2025

Sri. A.V. Arlohan Kumar, S/o A.J. Vittal Rao, Aged about 44 vears. Occ. Private service, R/o H No 12-s-124. IVroosapet, "sanatn-r.rigar,'ill"Jtp""iry, Ranga Reddy District-50001 B Petition under section 24 of the c.p.c. praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High court may be pleased to wiftiJraw F.c o.P. 155 of 2024 on the fire of the il Addr District ind dessions Juag;-;um Prinicipal Family court, Medchal-Malkajgiri District at Kukatpally ano tnJ same may be transferred to the Family court Judge, Hanumakonda, Hanumakonda District. ...RESPONDENT lA NO: 2 OF 2025 Petition under section 15'l cpc praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of-the petition, the High court may oe pleaiea to stay att further proceedings in F.c.o.p. No.'155 of 202q on the fite of tAe riinoor. District and sessions Judge-cum-principal Family court, Medchal-Matt<algiri District at Kukatpally, pending disposal of the above Tr.C.M.p. Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri Srikanth Gunti Counsel for the Respondent: The Court made the following: ORDER HON'BLE SRT JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALTSHETTY I'RANSFL,IT CIVIL MISC ELLANEOUS PETITION No.176 of2025 ORDER: 'fhis T'ransler Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed seeking to transler IiCOP.No.l55 of 2024 pending on the hle of the Principal Famity Cour1, Medchal-Malkajgiri District at Kukatpally to the Fan.rily Courl, Ilanamkonda. l{eard Sri Srikanth Gunti, Iearned counsel fbr petitioner' No 2. representation for the respondent, despite service of notice' there(bre. the matter is disposed o1'basing on the material available on lecord.

3. The brief facts of the case, shorn-off unnecessary details, requircd 1or actjudication of this Tr.C.M'P', as averred in the at1rdavit tlled in suppofi of the TTCMP, Ztre that the petitioner and respondent are wife and husband; that their marriage was solemnized on 14.11.2019 at Kazipet, Hanamkonda District as per Hindu rites and customs; that soon after the man iage, the petitioner joined thc rnatrirnonial company of the respondent; and thereafter, unable to bear the physical and mental harassment meted out by hcr in the hands of the respondent, she lodged a complaint against \ 2 LNA. J T.CMP.No.l76 of 2025 him, which was numbered as CC.No.2l3 8 of 2024 on the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Hanamkonda, for the offences punishable under Section 498-4 and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The petitioner also fited MC.No. t of 2024 before the Family Court, Hanamkonda and DVC.No.6 of 2024 before the a I Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Hanamkonda and all the said cases are pending. In the meanwhile, respondent filed FCOP.No. 155 of 2024 before the Family Court, Medchal- Malkajgiri District at Kukatpally, seeking dissolution of marriage. 3.1. The petitioner further averred that her lather expired in the year 2015; that she is residing with her mother aL Kazipet, Hanamkonda District and is depenclent on her mother, who being a senior citizen, requires her care and therefore, it is difficult for her to travel the long distance of 180 kms from Kazipet to Kukatpally for attending the Court proceedings on every date ofhearing of the FCOP and prayed to allow this TrCMp. 4. Learted counsel for the petition er, apart from reiterating the averments made in the affidavit, submitted that the respondent is appearing in the MC, CC and DVC cases filed by the petitioner in the Courls at Hanamkonda and therefore, no prejudice would be \/ \/ 1 LNA. J TtCLlP.No-176 oJ202s J caused to respondent il the FCOP is transferred as sought for and accordingly, prayed to allow the Tr'CMP'

5.ltisrelevanttorelertotheunderlyingprinciplegoverning the proceedings under Section 24 of the CPC seeking transfer of the case, appeal or other proceedings, which is enunciated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in a catena ofjudgments and the same was lollowed bt' various High Courts'

6. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in NCV Aishwaryu Vs' A'S' Sartvono krthik S/ralhetd as follows: "Tlrc cardinal principle for exercise of power under Section 21 oJ'rhe Cotle of Civil Procedure is that the ends of justice shoLtlcl tlemcuttl rhe transfer of the suit' appeal or other proc'et:ding. In malrimoniaL matlers' wherever Courts are caLLetl upon to consider the plea of transfer' the Courts have to take inlo consideration the economii soundness of both the parties, tlu social strata o.f the spouses and their behavioral plttern, their slantictrcl oJ life prior to the marriage and sltbsequettt thereto and lhe circumstances of both the parties in eking out their livelihood and under whose protective untbrella they are seeking their sustenance to life' Given the prevailing sot'io- economic paradigm in the Indian society' generctlllt. it is the wife's convenience which must be looked jt white consklering transfer. " l | 2022 SCC Online sc 1199 4 LNA. J TtCfiIP.No.176 oI2Ds ,t

7. The principle of law laid down by the Hon,ble Supreme Court in N.C.V. Aishwaryt's case (3d cired supra), has been reiterated by the High Court of Bombay in Devika Dhiroj patit Nee Devika Jayprakash Buftepatil v. Dhiraj Sunil pariil, and observed as under: - "ln a country like India, important decisions such as marriage, divorce are still taken with the guidance and blessings of eltlers in the family. For a lady to travel alone for the proceedings to a Court where the fate of lrcr marriage is going to be decided without any family member would definitely be a matter o.f concern and. couse not only physical inconvenience but also emotional and psychologicol inconvenience.,'

8. Further, the High Court of Bombay in priyanka Rahul Patil v. Rahul Ravindra patif followed the principte laid down in N.C. V.Aishwarya's case (3.d cited supra) and, Devika Dhiraj Palil Nee Devika Jayprakash Buttepalil's case (4,h cited supra), and held as follows:-r "The underlying principle governing the proceedings under Section 24 of the CPC, is that convenience of ?(2O23,SCC OnLine Bom 1926) r(2023 sCC Online Bom 1982) I I,NA- J TTCLIP-No.t76 of 2025 ) the wilb is to be preJbrred over the convenience of the httsband. " g. Thus, there are catcna of decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and other High Courts to the effect that in matrirnonial matters/disputes, while considering the application for transf-er of the proceedings from one Court to another Court' the Courts must give preferencc to the convenience of the wife over the couvenience of thc husband'

10. This 'lr.C.M.P is fited principally on the ground that the petitioner is residing with her mother at Kazipet and is dependent on her r-uothet'ancl she has to take care ofher old aged mother and as such, it is dilficult for her to travel lrom the said place to Kukatpally, which is at a distance of 180 kms on each and everv date olhearing oIFCOP filed by the respondent'

11. It is further case of the petitioner that MC' CC and DVC filed by her are pending in the Courts at Hanamkonda and the respondent is appearing betbre the Courts in the said cases and therefore, it r'vould be convenient even for respondent if the FCOP \ 6 r,cMp-N". t 76:;\;rrrs rs transGrred from the Court at Medchal_Malkajgiri District at Kukatpally to the Court at Hanamkonda.

12. In view of the aforesaid facts and circurnstances of the case and further, in view of the underlying principle enunciated by the Flon,bte Supreme Court and var.ious other High Courts in the aforesaid judgments that the convenience of the wi f.e has to be given priority/preference over the convenience of the husband, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioner has made out a case for transfer of the FCOp filed by ilre respondent and therefore, this TrCMp deserves to be allowed.

13. Accordingly, this Tr.C.M.p. is allowed and FCOp.No.l55 of 2024 on the file of the principal Family Court, Medchal_ Malka-jgiri District at Kukatpally is transferred to the Farnily Court, Hanamkonda, for disposal in accordance with law.

14. 'fhe Principal Family Courl, Medchal_Malkajgiri District ar Kukatpally, shall transmit the entire original record in FCOP.No. 155 of 2024, duly indexed, to the Family Court, Hanamkonda, preferably within a period of one month from the dale of receipt of a copy ot.this order. I I i LNA, J T{MP.No.I76 of 2025 7

15. Pending miscellaneous apptications, if any' shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs SD/.MOHD. ISMAIL DE UTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER \ To,

1. The lll Additionar District. and sessions Judge-cum prinicipar Family court, Medchal-Malkajgiri District at Kukatpally

2. The Family Court Judge, Hanumakonda, Hanumakonda District. 3. One CC to Sri Srikanth Gunti, Advocate [OpUC] 4. Two CD Copies VH/PSL \tP HIGH COURT DATED: 2210712025 ) t t 26 tEt D,EsPArcH sO .\ P ! .at * ORDER TRCMP.N o.176 ot 2025 ALLOWING THE TR.CMP b / ab6 1l