The High Court · 2025

Petition Under Section 24 of the C.P.C. Praying that in the circuqnstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to withdraw the O.P No. 32 of 2024 on the file of the Hon'ble Family Court Cum lV Addl District and Sessions Court at Adilabad and transfer the same to the Hon'ble Senior Civil Judge-Cum-Assistant Sessions Judge at Peddapalli. lA NO: 1 OF 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 stay all further proceedings in O. P No. 32 oI 2024 on the file of the Honble Family Court-Cum lV Addl. District and Sessions Court at Adilabad. Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr. M. Mallesham Counsel for the Respondent: Sri S. Surender Reddy The Court made the following: ORDER */ :r-: HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI ITARAYANA I\LISHETTY Tr.C.M.P.No.434 of 2ol24 ORDER: This Transfer Civil Miscellaneous petition is liled seeking transfer of rJ.P.No.32 of 2024, pending on the file ol Family Court- cum-lV District and Sessions Court at Adilabad to S(lnior Civil Judge_ cum-Assistant Sessions Judge at Peddapalli.

2. Heard Sri M.Mallesham, learned counsel for lretitioner and Sri S.Surender Ileddy, learned counsel for the responder t.

3. The brief f'acts of the case, shorn-off unnecessary details, required for adjuclication of this Tr.C.M.p., as averrc d in the affidavit filed in support of the Tr.C.M.p., are that petitioner and respondent are wife arrd husband and their marriage warj performed on 07.06.2023, at Gayathri Gardens, near Ayyapptr Mandir, Chanda Road at Adilabad, as per the customs prevailing in Hi,tdu Community. Immediately, after marriage, the petitioner joined the matrimonial house of respondent; that thereafter disputes and r lifrerences arose between thern, and the respondent filed D.O.p.No.32 of 2024, before the Family court-cum-Iv Additional district and Sessions Judge at Adilabad, seeking for divorce; that the petitioner is n rw residing with her old aged parents at Kapulapaili Mandal, peddap. i District; that she has no independent source of income and is dr.pendent on her parents; that the distance between peddapali to Adilalrad is l9O kms., -\\ 2 therefore, she cannot travel such long distance to appear on every date of hearing in OP.No.32 of 2024. Hence, the present Tr'CMP' is frled. Learned Counsel for the pelitioner apart from reiterating the 4. averments made in the afhdavit submitted that the petitioner is pursuing MBA at Mother Theressa College of Engineering & Technolory, Peddapalli, and she cannot travel from Peddapalli to Adilabad on each date of hearing in OP.No 32 of 2024, thus, prayed to allow the Tr.CMP.

5. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent would submit that except saying that the petitioner has no independent income and she is residing along with her parents'at Peddapalli, no other grounds are raised by the petiLioner for transfer of OP from Adilabad to Peddapalli. He further submits that respondent is ready and willing to bear the expenses incurred by the petitioner for attending hearing at Adilabad in OP.No.32 of 2024. He finally contended that Tr'CMP is devoid of merits and is liable to be dismissed'

6. This Court has given earnest consideration to the submissions made by both the counsel and perused the record' Perusal of record would disciose that the Tr'CMP is ltled 7 . principally on the ground that the petitioner is residing with her parents at Peddapalli; that she has no independent income and she I t I I i3E:- 3 is dependt:nt on her parents. Further, the clistance between Peddapalli t:o Adilabad is 19O kms.; that it would be quite difficult for her to travel all the way from Peddapalli to Adilabad, to attend the Court proceedings on each date of hearing in OP.No.il2 of 2024; and except the aforesaid grounds no other grounds are r rised.

8. During the course of hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is pursuing MBA at Mother Theressa College of Engineering & Technolory, Peddapalli, and also placed on record the bonafide certificate issued by the college to the effect that the petitionr:r is pursuing MBA in the said college.

9. The specihc case of the respondent is that th,: respondent is ready and rvilling to bear the travelling expenses ;f petitioner to attend the Court at Adilabad; and that the ground; raised by the petitioner that she is residing with her parents at Pe ldapally and is unable to tr:rvel from Peddapalli to Adilabad, do not,:onstitute valid grounds for [ransfer of OP.No.32 of 2024. 1O. I-earn<:d Counsel for respondent placed reliance on the following Judgments/ orders: (i) Antndita Das vs. Srijit Das 2006 (91 SCC 197 (iif Order in TrCMP.No.64 of 2024, dated,25.016.2o124 (iiif Common order ln Tr.CMP. No.8O9 of 2OL6, dated C6-12-2O18. + ''j a] I1. The F{on'ble S.ip::;, -..cij,ri. --l Anindlta Das's ease (citec' supra), filed by the petitioner/wife therein was dismissed on the ground that the respondent was directed to pay all travel and stay expenses of the petitioner and her companion for every visit when she is required to attend the Court at Delhi.

12. Tr.CMP.No.64 of 2024 f-rled by the petitioner/wife therein was dismissed vide orders dated 25.06.2024 ort the ground that both the parties therein are residing at Nirmal and as such, there is no reason to transfer the FCOP pending in the Court at Nirmal to the Courts at Hyderabad or Ranga Reddy District, as sought for by the petitioner therein.

13. In the present case, admittedly, the petitioner is residing with her parents at Peddapalli and respondent is residing at Adilabad, unlike in TrCMP.No.64 of 2024, where both the parties therein are residing at Nirmal, therefore, the facts of the said case are not similar with that of present case and hence, the said order is of no aid to the respondent.

14. Tr.CMP.No.8O9 of 2016 and batch, which were frled by the petitioners/wives therein, were dismissed by learned single Judge of erstwhile High Court of Andhra Pradesh, vide common order dated O6.l2.2}la. In the said common order, the learned single Judge has lald d,g$fr certain guidelines ;o ';:e:c:s: the power under Section 24 ./1 w 5 CPC in matrimonial cases and further, held that the cases of the petitioners / wives therein does not fall in any of tte said guidelines and also the guidelines of the Hon'ble Supreme Co trt in Kulwind.er Kaur @ .Kulwinder Gurcharan Singh ys. Kandi Friend.s Education Tvust and othersr and accordingly, reje:ted the prayer of the petitionr:rs /wives therein seeking transfer of the cases.

15. In the light of the aforesaid Judgment ot the Honourable Supreme Court and the orders passed by this Cour t, this Court is of the considet'ed view that the TT.CMP cannot be ente rtained on merely asking without there being any vaiid and sufficierrt ground. In the present case) except saying that the petitioner is resi iing at peddapalli with her parents and is unable to travel such long distance from Peddapalli to Adilabad, no other grounds are raised. Therefore, in considered opinion of this Court is that the petitioner is not made out a case for trernsfer of OP.No.32 of 2024 .

16. Considering the facts and circumstances of th( case, this Court is of the considered view that the Tr.CMp can be disposed of with the following directions:- i) Respondent shall reimburse actual travellin6 expenses of the petitioner whenever she personally appears in O.p.No.32 of 202,1, pending on the file of Familv rlourt_cum_IV Addl.District and Sessions Court at Adiiabad. ' 2oo8(3) scc 6s9 5 .-J-. - The learned Jucige, Family C'ourt -cum-IV- o ii) Addl.District and Sessions Court at Adilabad, is directed not to insist for the appearance of the petitioner on each and every date of adjournment, except the date on which her presence is required for adjudication of the rnatter'

17. With the above observation, the present Tr'CMP is disposed of' No costs. 18 Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed' SD/. M. JAWAHAR REDDY ss TANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER V To, '1 . The Family Court Cum lV Addl. District and Sessions Court at Adilabad 2. The Senior Civil Judge-C um-Assistant Sessions Judge at Peddapalli. 3. One CC to Sri M. Mallesham, Advocate IOPUC] 4. One CC to Sri S. Surender Reddy, Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CD Copies karntsh M HIGH COURT DATED:1810712025 1t\ESrA I(

1.- ( 10IEP zffi ,,/ 't * ORDER TRCMP.No.434 of 2024 DISPOSING OF THE TR.CMP q -Ld