Mavuri Prameela Nagalakshmi v. Mavuri Shanmukheswar
Case at a glance
- Decided
- 24 Apr 2012
- Bench
- C V NAGARJUNA REDDY
Provisions considered
Judgment
Cause title
Counsel for the petitioner:
Sri Dasari S.V.V.S.V.Prasad Counsel for respondent: --- The Court made the following:
ORDER:
This petition is filed seeking transfer of F.C.O.P.No.85 of 2011 from the Family Court-cum-Additional District Judge, Rajahmundry, East Godavari District to the Court of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Parvathipuram, Vizianagaram. Even though notice was served on the respondent, he has not entered appearance. The petitioner is the legally wedded wife of the respondent. Serious matrimonial disputes arose between them leading to filing of spate of cases. The respondent filed F.C.O.P.No.85 of 2011 on the file of the Family Court-cum-Additional District Judge, Rajahmundry, under Section 13(i)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short ‘the Act’) seeking divorce. The petitioner filed a counter affidavit and has been contesting the same. On her part, the petitioner filed M.C.No.29 of 2011 under Section 125 Cr.P.C., and D.V.C.No.11 of 2011 under Section 12 of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 in the Court of the learned Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Parvathipuram. She has also filed H.M.O.P.No.25 of 2011 under Section 9 of the Act for restitution of the conjugal rights in the Court of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Parvathipuram. It is stated in the affidavit filed by the petitioner that all the above cases have been pending. She pleaded that the distance between Rajahmundry and Parvathipuram is about 500 kms and that she is living with her old aged parents at Parvathipuram who are not in a position to travel along with her to attend the case at Rajahmundry and that in the absence of male assistance, she cannot undertake long journeys. As the respondent failed to contest the case, the averments made in the affidavit of the petitioner remain uncontroverted. As the three cases filed by the petitioner are pending at Parvathipuram and she being a woman without proper male assistance, it is not only proper but also expedient to transfer the divorce OP filed by the respondent to the Court at Parvathipuram. Accordingly, F.C.O.P.No.85 of 2011 on the file of the Family Court-cum-Additional District Judge, Rajahmundry, East Godavari District is transferred to the Court of the learned Senior Civil Judge at Parvathipuram. The Tr.C.M.P., is accordingly allowed. As a sequel to disposal of the Tr.C.M.P., Tr.C.M.P.M.P.No.866 of 2011 shall stand disposed of as infructuous. C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY, J 24th April, 2012 VGB
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 — s. 13(i)(ia); Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 125; Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 — s. 12.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Andhra Pradesh High Court, on 24 Apr 2012. The bench was C V NAGARJUNA REDDY.
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.