The Hon'ble SuPreme Court IN NCV Aishutarya v. A.S.Scrraucna Karthik Shar held as follows

:SRI. J KONDA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent :SRI RATHAN SINGH M The Court made the following : ORDER 'i- ( HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY TRANSFER CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.443 of 2o24 ORDER: This Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed seeking to transfer F.CO.P.No. I 141 of 2024 on the file ol- the learr-red Judge, Famill, Court, Ranga Reddy District, At L.lS.Nagar to the Court of leamed Judge, Farnily Court, Wanaparth_v, Wanaparthy District.

2. Hearcl Mr. J. Iionda Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner. No replesentation on behalf of thc respondent, though Mr. Ratan Singh, Advocate, entered appearance on behatf of rcspondent. Therefore, the matter is disposed of basing on tlLe material available on record.

3. The Brief facts leading to filling of the presenr Tr.C.M.p are that the marriage of tl-re petitioner-wife was solemnizcd with the respondent-husband on 15.04.2022 zrt Aloor Kotha Thanda, Aloor, Jadcharla Mandal as per the prt:vailing customs in their community and soon after their mzLrriage the petitioner joined with the company of respondent. It is averred that respondent and his parents ill treatcd the petitioner and started harassing her for additional rlowry and also suspected her character and was necked out from LNA. J TrCMP.No.,l43 oJ 2024 "i3,". 7 matrimonial house and that unable to bear the physical harassment and abuse by respondent, and his family members, for want of additional dowry, the petilioner lodged a complaint in Crime No.94 of 2024 on 24 .O7 .2024 before Jetprol (Veepanagandla) Police Station, Wanaparthy under Section 4g8-A, 323 read with Section 34 of IPC and 3, 4 of Dowry Prohibition, Act. She also filed DVC No.30 of 2024 before the learned Principal Judicial First-Class Magistrate, at Wanaparthy District and the same is pending. Respondent herein filed F.C.O.P.No. 114l of 2024 for divorce before Family Court, Ranga Reddy District, at L.B.Nagar.

3.1. It is further averred that at present, she is taking shelter in her parent's house and is hnancially dcpendent on her parents and she cannot travel alone and appear before the Family Court at Ranga Reddy District without male assistance and further the distance between Wanaparthy and Ranga Reddy District is more than 140 Kilometres, which is burdensome on her parents. In those set of circumstances, the petitioner hled the present Tr.C.M.P.

4. karned counsel for the petitioner apart from reiterating the averments made in the Tr.C.M.P, contended that the respondent is appearing in D.V.C No.3O of 2O24 t I NA.J 1rCMP.No.4,1J of2024 3 before Principal Judicial First Class Magistrate, Wanaparthy' Therefore, if the matter is transferred from Ranga Reddy District to Wanaparthy District no prejudice would be caused to the responclent ancl hence, prayed to allow the present TT.CMP

5. This Court considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the material available on rccord.

6. The undcrlying principle governing the proccedings under Section 24 of the CPC seeking transfer of the case, appeal or other proceedings, is enunciated by the Hon'ble Supreme Courl in a catena ol judgmen ts and the same was followecl b1' various High Courts.

7. The Hon'ble SuPreme Court IN NCV Aishutarya Vs. A.S.Scrraucna Karthik Shar held as follows: " The card.inat principle for exercise of pouter under Section 24 of the, Code of Ciuil Procedure is that the ends of justice should demand the transfer of the suit, appeal or other proceeding. In matimonial matters, tuhereuer Courts are called upon to consider the plea of transfer, tle Courts haue to take into consideration the economic soundness of both the parties, the sociol 1 2022 SCC Online sc 1199 4 LNA, J T|CMP.i'o.|11 oJ2024 strata of the spouses and their behauioural pattern, their standard of life prior to the mariage and subsequent thereto and the circumstonces of both the parties in eking out their liuelihood and under uLhose protectiue umbrella th.eg are seeking their sustenancc to Itfe. Giuen the preuailing socio- economic paradigm in the Indian societg, generally, it is the tutfe's conuenience u.thich must be looked at uhile consideing transfer."

8. The principle of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in N.C.V.Aishutaryd's cdse (srd cited supra.), has been reiterated by lhc High Court of Bombay in Deuika Dhiraj Patit Nee Deuika Jagprakash Buttepqtil a. Dhiraj Sunit Patit2, and observed as under:- "In a country tike India, important decisions such as manriage, diuorce ore still taken with the guidance and blessings of elders in the familg. For a ladg to trauel alone for the proceedings to a Court uhere tLrc fate of her marriage is going to be decided toithout any family member would definiteLg be a mdtter of concern and cause not only phgsical inconuenience but also emotional and p s y cholo g ical inconu e nie nce.' / (2023 scc OnLine Bom 1926) (' 5 LN,t, J 1i(-rI P.No.'l1l of 2021

9. Further, tlre High Court ol Bombay in Priganka Rahul Patil v. Rahul Rauindra PatiP followed the principle laid down in N.C.V.Aishwaryc's case (3rd cited supra) and Devika Dhiraj Patil Nee Devika Jagprakash Buttepatil's case (46 cited supra), and held as follows:- "The underlyingl pinciple gouerning the proceedings under Section 24 of the CPC, is tlmt conuenience of the tutfe is to be preferred ouer the conuenience of the husbond." lO. Thus, thcre are oatena of decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and other High Courts to the eflecl that in matrimonial matters / disputes, while considering the application for lransfer ol' the proceedings from one Court to another Court, the Collrts must give preferencc to the convenience of the rvife over the convenience of the husband. I l. The present Tr.C.M.P. is filed principally on the ground that the petitioner is dependent upon her parents and that the distance between Wanaparthy and Ranga Redd1, ls 266rrg 14O Kms. Further the petitioner cannot travel alone and appear on each date of hearing without assistance from her family members. ' 12023 SCC OnLine Bom 1982) 6 LNA, J TICMP.l\o.1tJ of202t

12. It is also relevant to . note that the DVC case between the parties is pending before the Principal Judicial First Class Magistrate at Wanaparthy and the respondent is appearing in that case, whereas F.C.O.P filed by the respondent-husband is pending before the Court at Ranga Reddy.

13. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of thc case and in the light of the principle laid down in the aforesaid decisions, this Court is inclined to accede to the request of the pctitioner-wife seeking transfer of the case'

14. Therefore, in view o[ the underiying principle enunciated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and various other High Courts in the aforesaid judgments that the convenience of the petitioner/wife has to be given priority/ preference over the convenience of the respondent/ husband, this Tr'CMP deserves to be allowed.

15. Accordingly, this Tr.C.M.P. is allowed and F.C.O.P.No.1 141 of 2024 on the hle of the learned Judge , Famity Court, Ranga Reddy at L.B.Nagar is transferred to the Court of Judge, Family Court Wanaparthy, Wanaparthy District, in accordancc with 1aw. .*,?r' . ,.t.,*ri:U LA'4, J TrCllP.,\o.411 of2021 7

16. The learned Judge, Family Court, Ranga Reddy at L.B.Nagar shall transmit lhe entire original record in F C'O'P No.1141 ol 2024, duly indexed, to the Court of Judge, Family Court, Wanaparthy, Wanapart.hy District preferably ivithin a period of one (1) month from the date ol receipt of a copy oi this order.

77. Pending misceliancous applications, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs //TRUE COPY// D/- A.V.S. PRASAD PUTY REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER To, l The Court of the Judge, Family Court, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar.

2. The Court of the Judge Family Court, Wanaparthy, Wanaparthy District.

3. One CC to SRI J. KONDA REDDY Advocate [OPUC] 4. One CC to SRI RATHAN SINGH M Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CD Copies pcsd/gh HIGH COURT DATED:1710G12025 ORDER TRCMP.N0.443 of 2024 1I,E S 14; O\1 Y J ,) o 29 JlJt zffi D€g r.r.1 1 qt " * o .\ .ti ALLOWING THE TRANSFER CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETIT!ON ),o €