High Court of Bourbay in Devilru Dhiroi Patil Nee Det,ilru Jayprakaslt Bunepatil v. Dhiraj Sunil Patii, and ohsclved as urlder

HON,BI,B SRI JUSTICE LAXIIII NARAYANA i LISI-IETTY TRANSFER CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.260 of 2024 ORDER: This Transl-cl Civil Miscellaneous Petition is trled r,ccking to transler 1rClOP.No.299 of 2024 pending on thc file of the Princi ral Farnily Court, Secunderabad to Additional Famill, Cour1, Ranga Ii.eddy District at L.B.Nagar

2. Heard Sri I'.P.avi KiLan. learned counscl lbr thc oclitionel and Sri K.Mohan Goud, lealnecl courrsei [br tlie respondent.

3. The brief facls ol the case, shorn-ofl unnecessary det.ails, r'equired lor adjudication of this Tr.C.M.P., are that the petitioner and respondent are wilc and husband and thcir malriage was pcrlolrned on 3 I .12.2020 at Arya Vanga Anantha Ileddy (iardens, Srinidhi Colouy, SaLrrurnagar Mandal, R.lt.District, as per Hindu rites and customs; that out of t reir rvedlock they were blessed with onc girl chitd; that therealter the petiticner u,as subjected to harassment, both physically and mcntally; and tha t the respondent withdrew from petitioner's company on, 01 .09.2022. TlLc petitioner filed FCOP.No.266 of 2023 on the file o1' Additionat Family Court, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar fol restitution of conjugal rilihts and aiso flled case vide DVC.No.62 of 2023 and the sar11e is pendi rg before the VI ,/ 2 LNA. J TrCtlP.No.260 of2024 \:* Metropolitan N.{agistrate Courl, R.R.District at L.B.Nagar. It is further averred that tl're respondent tlled GWOP.No.64 of 2023 on the file of Family Court, ll.R.District at L.B.Nagar and FCOP.No.299 ol 2024 for divorce belirc thc Farnily CoLrrt, City Civil Couft at Sccunderabad. It is averred by thc petitioner that she is a working woman and she has to take care of her rninot' child, tl-rercforc, she cannot travel to Secunderabad on eaoh date of hcaling tbr appearing in ttre OP filcd by tlie lespondent. It is furtlrer avetred that FCOP.No.26(r of 2023 and DVC.No.62 ol 2023 filed by the petitioner as rvcll as CWOP.No.64 of 2023 filed by the lespondent, are pcnding betbrc the Coutls at Itanga Reddy at L.B.Nagar. Therefore, it is convenient fbr the petitioner, if FCOP.No.299 of 2024 is transl-erred to thc fite of Judge, farnily Court, R.R.District. I{ence, present TT.CMP IS fitcd.

4. Leanrccl Counsel lor the pctitioner apart from reiterating the averments urade in tlie affidavir subrnittcd that respondent is appearing in the cases fited by the petitioner for restitution of conjugal rights and for DVC. It is lurtheL submitted ttrat FCOI'}.No.266 of 2023 filed by the petitioner bclore the Addl.Famity Court, I{anga Reddy District and FCOP.No.299 of 2024 hled by the respondcr.rt for divorce have to be I I I I i ! I I I I I I i I I .) LNA, J 2 60 oJ 202 I 1'tCll P. ^'o. adjudicated by the same Courl to avoid conflicting decisions. I{ence, prayed to allow this TI.CMP.

5. Learned Counscl lor tl're respondent did not deny the fact that three cases llled by the petitioner and respottdent ale pendinl befbre the Ilanga Reddy District Couft at I-.B.Nagar; and that in all thc ttrree cases thc respondent is aplrearing. Flowevcr, he subrnitted that thc distance bctween the Rarga Reddy District Court aud Secunclerabad rs only 25 Kms., thelclble, no grounds are rnade out lor transler of FCCIP.No.299 of 2024 fiom City Civil Court, Secunderabad to Judge, Family Coult at Ranga Reddy District and as such prayed to dismiss the TT.CMI'

6. I[ is relevant to refer to the undellying princirrle governing the proceedings r-rnder Section 24 of the CPC seckir.rg transt'er ol the case, appeal or other proceedings, which is enunciated by thc I lon'ble Supremc Courl in a catena ofjudgments and the satre was follol,cd by various High Courls

1. The Hon'blc Supreme Court in NCV ,lishv,arytt Vs, A.S.Sora,ana Karthik.iial helcl as lollows: " The cfritat principle for erercise o;f'power untler lit:t:ti.rtrt 24 rtf the Code of Ct,il Proceclute i.s that the ends of ju.stice sht'ultl denand the 12022 SCC Online SC 1199 4 I,NA, J TTCMP.N'o.260 of2021 n-ansfbr a/ the suit, appeal or otlrcr proceeding. In matrinonial nlolters, v,hercvcr Courts ure colled ultort to consider the plea of trans/br, the Courts lmve to talic into consideration the economir: sotuulne.s.s oJ botlt thc p{tlia.t, lhe social strata of tlte sJ)ousc.t turcl their belrut'iotu al pattcnt, lheir slandard r5f life prior to th.e ntorriage cutd subsequent thcrclo and l.ltc circttrnstattces of both tlte parties in cliirtg out their livcliltood arttl ttnder whose proteclive umbrellu tlrcy are seel.i g tllcir sttlitenotce to lifb. Givett the prevail tg socio- economi<: purctligm in. the lruliatt socie$t, generally, it is the v,ilb's r:onveniencc,,t,lticlt nttrst bc lookad at u'hile considering tra us fbr. "

8. 'l'hc pLinciple of law laid down by the Flon'ble Supt'eme Courl in N.C.VAishwurya's cusa (3'd citetl snpra), has bccn reiterated by the High Court of Bourbay in Devilru Dhiroi Patil Nee Det,ilru Jayprakaslt Bunepatil v. Dhiraj Sunil Patii, and ohsclved as urlder:- " In o ctttrrtlr-.)t like india, intporldtll dt:cisiotts 'such as nturriogc, divorce u-c still taliut ttilh tlte guidattce and blessirtg.s of elder.r in tlrc fatnily. F-or o. Iady to trdrel akttrc.lbr llrc procecdings to a Ctrurl wlrcre tlte fole of lter marriage i.s goittg to lte. dccitletl v'illrcut ttn.y .[anil)t mcmbar v,ould clefititel)t ba ct nttrttt:r o.f cottccrn and causa not only physical inconvcnierrce but also ennlionul and psycln l ogical i ncotrer i ertcc. " \ \ ' 1Z0Zl scc online Bom 1926) I i i ! ! ) i t I T T - - :.4 .*.42.. I 5 LN.l. -t Tt(:tIP.No.260 o[)021 Furlher, the High Coutt of Bornbay in Priysnlts Rahul Putil v'

9. Rahul Ravindra Pafif lollowed the ptinciple aid dorvn in N.C.V.Aislrn'ctL'-),4'.s case (3''t cited supra) and Devika Dhiraj Putil Nee Devilca Jayprakush Butteputil's case (4'r' cited supra). anct helcl as lbllorvs:- "Tlrc underlt,irtg principle got'erning the proceedi'tgs t'utder Scction 24 of the CPC' is lhat cctnveniencc of the w'li' is to bc prelerred otcr the convenk:nce ofthe husbuttd "

10. Thus. there are catena of decisions of the l{on'ble Supreme Courl and otlier I-ligh Coults to the etlect that in matrimonial mattersidisputes, while considering the application lor transl-er of the proceedings fi'om one Courl to another Court, the Cotttts must give prel-erencc to thc convenience of thc wife over the cor vcnie nce of the husband. ll. A perusal of record would disclose that FCOP.2i6 of 2021 filed by tl.re petitioner tbr restitution of conjugal rights is perrding befbre the Additional Family Cour1, Ranga Reddy District itt I-.B.Nagar. DVC.No.(r2 of 2023 tited by the petitioner and GWOI'.I.\o-64 of 2023 filed by the respondent are pending beforc the R.l.-.[)istrict Courl, whereas the FCOP.No.299 of 2024 hled by the lespondcnt for divorce is r (zoz3 scc o,lfr{ in" eorn tsazl ,/ I 6 I,NA. J 7iC)tl P.,\'o.260 of 202t pending bcfolc the Faurily Coult, City Civil Court, Sccunderabad. It is also not in dispute that the respoudent is appearing ttl thc cases pcnding befbre the R.R.District Court. lrurthcr, in considcrcd opinion of this CouLt that ICOI'.No.2(r(r of 2023 fited by the petitioner tbl r'estitution of coniugal lights and trCOI'.No.299 ol'2024 tited by thc lcspondcnt tbr divorce are to be decided by tlie sanrc Coult to avoid any conllicting dccisions. 'l.hcrclbre, this Court is o l' considcrccl vierv that the petitioner rracle out a case lor translct' of trCOI).No.299 ol 2024 ll'orn the I'rt.Famity CoLrrt, City CiVil Court, Sccuutlct'abad to Additional Farnily Cour1, Ranga l{cddy District.

12. [ror thc tbregoing reasolls arld firlthcr, iu vieu' of tlie undcrlying principle enunciated by thc Ilon'blc SLrpre me coulf and various othcr IIigh courts in thc alorcsaid Jr.rdgL'r.rents tliat the couvenicncc of thc wife has to bc givcn p|iority/prefclence ovet the cottvctricncc ol'thc husbar-rd, ttris Courl fincls that thc glouncls urgcd try the petitioner sccking tt'ansfer ol ttre FCOP arc justil-rable and therelbre. this IT.CMP dcservcs to be allowcd. l3. Accordingly, this Tr.C.M.P. is allowed and FCOI'.No299 of 2024, pending on the file of thc Principal Fanlily Coult, Sccunderabad i9, I t I I I I i I i I I i I I I I I l I : -::-. rri{_- '' ,/ 7 L^.'t.l r, C tI l'. \n)n(t of 2ltll transl-errcd to the courl ol Additionat Family c()urt, l{.lt.District at L.B.Nagar, lor clisposal itr accordancc rvith larv

14. 't'ttc Princiltat Faniity Cttr,rfl, Sccr.rtrderabad, shall rltrtsuit thc cntir-c or.iginat r.ecor.d in FCOI'.No.299 al 2024, duly indcxccl. t,r the Atlilitional Farnily Court, R.lL.District at L.B.Nagar, pref'erably witl irr a lleriotl of one rnonth 1iom the date ol'receipt ola copy of this order. Pcnding n'tiscellaneous applications, i1'any. shall stancl closed. 'I'hele shallbe uo orclcr as to costs SDi. V.KAVITHA DEPUTY REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SEC OFFICER I To, 1 2 3. 4. 5 Svs/PS The Principal Family court, Secunderabad. The Additional Family court, R.R.District at L.B.Nagar One CC to Sri P.Ravi Kiran, Advocate tOpUCj One CC to Sri Kongala Mohan Goud, Advocate tOpUCl Two CD Copiesb HIGH COURT DATED:0810712025 I .1 ' r,, : t' -, ..,]. 1 \.*.\. /,.. \-' . -:\ ' {r. 0 siP 26 ir),. .-.- t) 't )):,\ \\ il ' a.\ {'. ORDER TRCMP.No.260 of 2024 ALLOWING THE TRCMP H