The Hon'ble Supreme Court in NCV Aishuarya v. A.S.Sarauana Karthik Shar ht

Petition under section 'l 5'l cPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit fited in support of the petition, the High court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings in H.rM.O.P. No. 97 of 2024 on the file of the senior Civil Judge at KamareddY. lA NO: 2 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 extend the lnterim order dated 1 1-11-2024 in TT.CMP No. 465 0f 2024 for a f urther period. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRl. PRAKASH YARRA Counsel for the Respondents: NONE APPEARED' The Court made the following: ORDER HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY SFERCIVIL M ISCELLANEOU SPETITION No. 465 of 2024 T oRD ER: This Transfer Crvil Miscellaneous Petition is filed seeking to transfer of H M'O P No '97 of 2024 on the file of the learned Senior Civil Judge Court' at Kamareddy to the Court of learned Senior Civil Judge Court' at Nizamabad District'

2. Heard Mr' Y Prakash' learned counsel for the petitioner behalf of the resPondent on record. No representatlon despite service of notice Th"r"ft'r"' the matter is disposed of basing on the material available on record' The Brief facts leading to tiling of the present Tr'C M'P 3. are that the marriage of the petitioner-wife was solemnized with the respondent-husband on 19 '03 '2O 14 at Sherkhan Pally village, Nizam Sagar Mandal' Nizamabad District as per the Prevailing customs in their communitY and soon after their marriage the petitioner joined the company of respondent and out of their wedlock' they were blessed with one son. It is averred that thc petitioner was subjected to physical and mental harassment by the respondent who is addictedtoalcoholandtherefole,sheleftmatrimonialhouse and is now living with her parents at Mallaram' Nizamabad' 2 L^.4. J Trc'rl P.,\o,l 6 5 of 20 2 t .1 Thc petitioner has filed Maintcnance Case No. 13 of 2Ol9 before II Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, at Nizamabad and has also filed O.P.No.72 of 2Ol9 before Senior Civil Judge, Nizamabad sceking judicial separation by reasor-r o[ cruelty and same is pending. In the meanwhile, respondent herein filed H.M.O.P.No.97 of 2024 on the file of the learned Senior Civil Judge Court, al Kamareddy for dissolution of the marriage.

3.1. It is further averred that at present, she is taking shelter in her parent's house and is financially dependent on her parents and she has to take care of her minor child. Moreover, the distance between Mallaram and Kamareddy is more than 130 Kilometres, thcrefore, it is difhcult for the petitioner to travel from Mallaram to Kamareddy to attend the H.M.O.P. In those set of circumstances, the petitioner filcd the present Tr.C.M.P.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner apart from reiterating the averments made in the Tr.C.M.P, contended that respondent is appearing in the M.C.No.13 of 2019 and O.P.No.72 of 2079 filed by the petitioner which are pending at Nizamabad. Therefore, if the matter is transferred from file of the learned Senior Civil Judge Court, at Kamareddy to the L,\'A. J TrcttP.\o.J6i oI)0)1 Court of learned Senior Civil Judge Court, at Nizamabad District, no prejudice would be r;aused to the respondent and further contended that convt nience of wile has to be considered as against the convenience of the husband in the matrimonial matter and hence, prayed to allow the present Tr.C.M.P.

5. This Court considered thc submissions made bv learned counsel for the petitioner and pr:rused the material available on record

6. The underlying principle gove rning the proceedings under Section 24 of Ll e CPC seeking transfer of the case, appeal or other proceedings, is enunciate<l by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in a catena of judgments and the same was lollowed bv various High Courts.

7. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in NCV Aishuarya Vs. A.S.Sarauana Karthik Shar ht:[d as follows: " The cardinal pinciple Jor exercise of pouer under Section 24 of the Code o_f Ciuil Procedure is thctt the ends of justice should denLond the transfer of the suit, appeol or other proceeding. ht matimonial matters, uh?laer Courts ore called upon to consider the pLea of transfer, the Courts haue to take into consideratiort the ' 2022 SCC Online SC 1199 4 LNA. J T|CMP.No.465 of202,1 economtc soundness of both the parties, the social strota oJ the spouses and their behauioural pattern, their standard of hfe pnor to the manriage and subsequent thereto and the circumstances of both the parties in eking out their liuelihood. and. under whose protectiue umbrella they are seeking their sustenance to life. Ciuen the preuailing socio_ economic paradigm in the Indian societg, generallg, it is tLLe wtfe,s conuenience uthich must be looked at uhile considering transfer."

8. The principle of law laid clown by the Honl:le Supreme Court in N.C.V.Atshuarya's case p.a cited suprd),has been reiterated by the High Court of Bombay in Devika Dhiraj Pdttl Nee Deaikq. Jagprakash Buttepat a. Dhiraj Sunil Patil2, and observed as under:_ "In a country tike Ind.ia, important decisions such as marriage, cliuorce are still taken with the guidance and. blessings of elders in the familg. For a ladg to trauel olone for the proceedings to a Court tuhere the fate of her rnariage is going to be d,ecid_ed. uithout ang familg member utould. d.efinitelg be a matter of concent and. cause not onlg phgsical inconuenience but o;lso emotional and_ p sy cholog ical inconu enie nce.', t (zo2: SE Online Bom 1926) a- 5 LNA. J T,C,VP.No.165 0f 202,1

9. Further, the High Court of Bombay in Priganka Ro,hul Patil v. Rahul Ra oind.ra PatiF followed the principle laid down in N.C.V.Aishuaryc's case (3'r cited supra) and Devika Dhiraj Patil Nee Deuika Jagprakash Buttepatil's case (4th cited supra), and held as follows:- "The underlging pirLciple gouerning the proceedings under Section 24 of the CPC, is that conuenience of the uife is to be prefered ouer the conuenience of the husband."

10. Thus, there are catena of decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and other High Courts to the effect that in matrimonial matters/ disputes, while considering the application for transfer of the proceedings from one Court to another Court, the Courts must give preference to the convenience of the wife over the convenience of the husband.

11. The present Tr.C.M.P is hled principally on the ground that she is dependent upon her parents and she has to take care of her minor child and therefore, it is difficult lor her to travel from Mallaram to Kamareddy on every date of adjournment. Further, for every hearing, she has to take assistance from her family members. -/ 3 (29?3 sCC Online Bom 1982) (r LNA, J Tr(ltl P. No.,t65 oJ 2021

12. It is also relevant to note that the MC.No.13 of 2019 and O.P.No.72 of 2Ol9 are pending at Nizamabad, whereas H.M.O.P filed by the respondent-husband is pending before the Court at Kamareddy and the respondent is appcaring in the said cases and therefore, no prejudice would be caused to respondent if the H.M.O.P.No.97 of 2024 is transferred to Nizamabad.

13. Therefore, taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case and in view of the underlying principle enunciated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and various other High Courts in the aforesaid judgments that the convcnience of the wile has to be given priority/ preference over the convenience of the husband, this TT.CMP deserves to be allowe d.

14. Accordingly, this Tr.C.M.F. is allowed and H.M.O.P.No.97 of 2024 on thc lile of the learned Senior Civil Judge Court, at Kamareddy is lransferred to the Court of learned Senior Civil Judge Court, at Nizamabad District in accordance with law.

15. The learned Senior Civil Judge Court, at Kamareddy shdl{ {gansmit the entire original record i.n H.M.O.P.No.97 of 2024, duly indexed, to the Court of learned Senior Civil Judge ,/ 7 '/ ti:i. J TrCrtP.\o.165 of 2021 Court, at Nizamabad District, preferably within a period of one (1) month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

16. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stancl closed. There shall be no order ets to costs. Sd/- L. LAKSHMI BABU Epurv REGISTRAR \D //TRUE COPYI' \ t SECTION OFFICER ---------l To,

1. The Senior Civil Judge at Kamareddy District 2. The Senior Civil Judge Couit at Nizamabad District 3. One CC to SRI PRAKASH Y' Advocate IOPUC] 4. Two CD CoPies MKN/PSL Yv' t HIGH COURT DATED:1910612025 ORDER TRCMP.No.465 o12024 l ( oR THE S la (?.: ') () 2 4 JUr 2025 +. -t .:' ' ) :; .r..,1,/ ALLOWING THE TRANSFER CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION 6*f& Yaf ilr.'