The Hon'ble Supreme Court in NCV' Aishwarya v. A.S.Saravana Karthik Shatheld as follows

R/o. Q.No.C2-5, Krishna Colony, Srirampur, ...RESPONDENT 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 withdraw the H.M.O.P.No. 99 of 2024 pending on the file of the Court of the Principal Senior Civil Judge at Mancherial and transfer the same to the court of Honourable Senior Civil Judge at Kothagudem, Bhadradri Kothagudem District. lA NO: 1OF 2024 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 grant stay of all further proceedings including appearance of the.petitioner in H.tr4.O.P.No. 99 of 2024 on the file of the Court of the Honourable Principal Senior Civil Judge at of the above Tr C tt/l P in this trlancherial, Pending disPosal Honourable Court . Counsel for the Petitioner KOWURI Counsel for the ResPondent: :SRl. KRISHNA KISHORE NONE The Court made the following: ORDER HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALTSHETTY TRANSFERCIVIL MI SCE LLANEOUS PETITIO N No.369 of 2024 ORDER: This Transfer civil Miscellaneous petition is filed seeking to transfer HMoP'No.99 of 2024 pending on the file of principar Senior Civil Judge at Mancheriual to Senior Civil Judge at Kothagudem, Bhadradri Kothagudem District.

2. Heard Sri K.Krishna Kishore, leamed counsel for the petitioner. There is no representation on behalf of respondent despite service of notice. Therefore, the matter is being disposed off basing on the material available on record.

3. The brief facts of the case, shorn-off unnecessary details, required for adjudication of this Tr.c.M.P., are that the petitioner and respondent are wife and husband and their marriage was performed on 0g.12.2022 at Si Veerabhadra Function Hal[, Kunavaram Road, Bhadrachalam, as per Hindu rites and customs; that soon after the marriage differences arose between petitioner and respondent and as such petitioner constrained to live with her parents at her native place; that the respondent filed HMOp.No.99 of 2024 seeking divorce on the file of Principal Senior civil Judge at Mancherial; that petitioner filed complaint under Section 498-4 and Sections 3 and 4 of 2 LA'4, J T{MP.No.369 of 2024 the D.P.Act; and that the Police have filed charge sheet in CC No 546 of 2024 and the same is pending before the Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Bhadrachala[r. The petitioner hled a maintenance case against the respondent vide MC.No.7 of 2024 and the same is pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate at Bhadrachalam. The petitioner also frled DVC.No.5 of 2024 against the respondent and the satne is pending before the Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Bhadrachalam. It is fufther averred that the petitioner has no independent income and she is dependent on her parents; that the distance betrveen Bhadrachalam and N{ancherial is about 350 kms.; and that the petitioner cannot travel alone, on every date of hearing to appear in HMOP case filed by the respondent, therefore, filed the present Tr.CMP.

4. Leamed Counsel for the petitioner apaft from reiterating the averments made in the affidavit would submit on instructions that the respondent is appearing in the matters pending before the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Bhadrachalam, therefore, it would be convenient for the respondent if the HMoP.No.99 of 2024 IS transfered from Mancherial to Bhadrachalam. Hence, prayed to allow this TI.CMP.

5. It is relevant to refer to the underlying principle goveming the proceedings under Section 24 of the CPC seeking transfer of the case, 3 LNA, J l:rCMP.No.369 oI2024 r 1 appeal or other proceedings, which is enunciated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in a cater.a of judgments and the same was followed by various High Courts.

6. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in NCV' Aishwarya Vs A.S.Saravana Karthik Shatheld as follows: " The cardinal principle /br exercise of power under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure is that the ends ofjustice should demand the transfer of the suit, appeal or other proceeding. In mdtrimonial matters, wherever Courts are called upon to consider the plea of transfer, the Courts hcne to take into consideration the economic soundness of both the parties, the social strata of the spouses and their behavioural pattern, their standard of life prior to the marriage and subsequent thereto and the circumstances oJ both the parties in eking out their livelihood and under whose protective umbrella they are seeking their sustenance to life. Given the prevailing socio- economic parrtdigm in the Indian society, generally, it is the wife's convenience which must be looked at while considering transfer. " 7 . The principte of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Courl in N.C.V.Aishwarya's case (3'd citetl supra), has been reiterated by the High Court of Bombay in Devika Dhirai Pstil Nee Devika Jayprakash Butteparil v. Dhiraj Sanit PatiP, and observed as under:- t 2022 SCC Online SC 1199 'z 12023 SCC OnLine Bom 1926) 4 I-\'A, J TtCVP.lio.369 of 2024 " In a countty like India, important decisiorts such as marriage, divorce are still take with the guidance and blessings of elders in the family. For a lady to travel alone for the proceedings to a Court where the fate of her marriage is going to be decided withott any Jamily member would definitely be a matter af concern and cause not only physical inconveniettce bttt also emotional and ps ycho I o gic al inconv enience. "

8. Fufther, the High Court of Bombay in Priyanka Rahul Patil v. Ruhul Ravintlra Patill folloived the principle laid down in N.C.V.Aishwatya's case (3'd cited supra) and Devika Dhirui Putil Nee Devika Jayprakash Buttepatil's case (4th cited supra), and held as follows:- "The trnderlying principle governing the proceedings under Section 21 of the CPC, is that convenience of the wife is to be preferred over the conventence of the husband. "

09. Thus, there are catena of decisions of thr: Hon'ble Supreme Court and other High Courls to the effect that in matrimonial mattersidisputes, while considering the application for transfer of the proceedings from one Court to another Court, the Courls must give preference to the convenience of the wife over the convenience of the husband. I lzoz: scc onLine Bom 1982) 5 LNA, J T.CMP.No.369 o12024

10. A perusal ofrecord would disclose that as many as three cases are pending at Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Bhadrachalam. It is also the contention of petitioner that she has no independent income and dependent on her parents; that the distance between Bhadrachalam to Mancheriai is about 360 Kms.; and that it is difficurt for her to traver such long distance on each date of hearing. In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the considered opinion of this Court is that the petitioner made out a case for transfer of HMOp.No.99 of 2024. \ I i . For the foregoing reasons and further, in view of the underlf ng principle enunciated by the Hon'ble Supreme court and various other T I High courts in the aforesaid Judgments that the convenience of the wife has to be given priority/preference over the convenience of the husband, this court hnds that the grounds urged by the petitioner seeking transfer of the HMoP are justifiable and therefore, this Tr.cMp deserues to be allowed.

12. Accordingly, this Tr.c.M.p. is allowed and HMop.N o.99 of 2024 is transferred from the Courl of principal Senior Civil Judge at Mancherial to the court of Senior civil Judge at Kothagudem, Bhadradri Kothagudem District, for disposal in accordance with law. 6 T,NA. J T{ IP.No.l69 oI2021

13. The Principal Senior Civil Judge Courl' Mancherial' shall transmit the entire original record in HMOP'No'99 of 2024' duly indexed' to the Court of Senior Civil Judge at Kothagudem' Bhadradri Kothagudem District,preferablyu'ithinaperiodofonemonthfromthedateofreceiptof a copy of this order- Pending miscellaneous apptications, if any' shall stand closed There shail be no order as to costs' \ i To, //TRUE COPY// Sd/. V. KAVITHA DEPUTY REGISTRAR hA' SECTION OFFICER /

1. The Principal Senior Civil Judge at [\4ancherial. 2. The Senior Civil Judge at Kothagudem,Bhadradri, Kothagudem district.

3. One CC to SRl. KRISHNA KISHORE KOWURI Advocate IoPUCI

4. Two CD Copies TLlkam ?+ ,>S '. 15 sEP 2025 o t' t^r' * S11i611r-i) HIGH COURT DATED:08/0712025 ORDER TRCMP.No.369 of 2024 ALLOWING TTIE TRANSFER C.M.P. \3 5 1-.t