IVI. Niharika v. Macharla Santosh

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 F.C.O.P.No.74B ot 2023 on the file of Judge, I Additional Family court, city civil court at Hyderabad and transfer the same to the court of District Judge, Bhupalpalh- District at Bhupalpally. IA 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 F.c.o.P.No.748 of 2023 on the file of Judge, Family Court, City Civil Court at Hyderabad, pending disposal of above Tr'C'M P' This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the petition .'19- Ih" Affidavit filed in support thereof and upon hearing the arguments of sri MoHD SADIQ ALl, Advocaie for the Petitioner and Sri R S SRAVAN KUtvlAR, Advocate for the Respondent. The Court made the following: ORDER I I I I I.IIE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE K. SUJAI{A TR.C.M.P.NO.506 0F 2024 ORDER This tr lnsfer pelition is filed by the petitioner seer<ing this Court tr, r rar s;fer F.C.O.P.No.748 of 2023 pend ng rn t te Iile of I-Additionrrl trmily Court, CiS Civil Court at Hyderabr d to the Court ol f )ist - ct Judge, Bhupalpally District at l3hupalpally.

2. Hr:aucl Sri Mohammed Sadiq Ali, learned coturscl for the petition()r a r: Sri R.S.Sravan Kumar, learned col nse for the respond:r t.

3. TL.c :,:rtr'.ention of learned counsel for the ltctiltont r is that the marrii,gc : f petitioner with the respondent was p,crfo rmed on

09.12.2021) rr Peddapur Vi11age, Bhupalapl y Manclal, Jaishanl<a - I ilrupalpally District. After the ma-ria11e p:titioner joined t -x rr s;pondent and both started their mrLrita I life at Hyderabaci a rC lived happily for some period. Tt,e p:titioner conceiveC rr, I during her 7h month pregnancy, her ftrt rcr took her with h Lnr lo their village for delivery. Since the.r. p:titioner observed :L'a stic change in the nature and atti; uclc 6f th6 2 i) respondent. The respondent without enquiring about the health condition of petitioner started demanding to transfer land admeasuring Ac.2.0O guntas in his favour which was accepted by the father of petitioner. Further, the .respondent also demanded the amount granted by the Government to the newly married woman under Kalyana Lakshmi Scheme. The petitioner gave birth to a maie child and the same was informed to the respondent but the respondent and his parents came to the house of parents of petitioner after one month of birth of the child.

4. Irarned counsel further submitted that petitioner lodged a complaint against the respondent and his parents in Koyyrr Police Station for the offences under Sections 29O, 306, 341 r/w.Sections 511 and 34 of Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC') and FIR was registered vide FIR No.56 of 2O23. Further, due to unbearable harassment of respondent, petitioner hled complaint vide FIR No.61 of 2023 for the offences under Sections 498-A of IPC ald Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, wherein charge sheet was hled and the same was numbered as C.C.No.1338 of 2023 pending on the file of Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Jayashankar Bhupalpally. Petilioner :,#TV 3 I l I l also fi1ed D. r.C.No.24 of 2023 on the hle of F,rinc ipal .Judicial First C a.,.s I\4agistrate, Bhupalpally and M.().No 28 of 2023 praying t() F.t ant maintenance @ Rs.25,000/- pr)r rr ont,t and all the said c irs( s are pending at Bhupalpally. The respont lent fiied F.C.O.P Nr>. 11B of 2023 before the l-Additionzrl F-,rmily Court, City Civil Clc,t rr, Hyderabad for grant of decrc,: of div, rrce and petitiont:r 1lI rl counter denying the allegations ler elec against her. As ttr : petitioner is residing with her pat ents at Bhupalp,al lr,, s hc cannot attend the Court at HyCere bad , though learned c(,Lt tsel for the respondent contended that petttioner is in Hydet'altac. she never resided in Hyderabad. Ht,nce , prayed this Cotirt r c transfer F.C.O.P. No.748 of 2023 fro:n tl Le file of I-Addition;11 I'rLmily Court, City Civil Court at Hyde -abad to the Court of D s. i:t ,,ludge, Bhupalpally District.

5. Orr lh: olhcr hand, learned counsel for thc resroncient contendcd th L, petitioner is frequently changing her addcess. In D.V.C, anri hilz intenance cases, she has mentioned her address as rente I hrt;se w,hereas in the present case, shr mt ntioned that she is rr:;rdrng with her parents. Further, the clse s at the fag end; tL e 1 e,titioner's evidence is completed; Ilws 1 tc 3 were already exirrl;red; the evidence of Rw.4 was eschewr d atrd Rw.5 4 (\ was partly examined. At this stage, no purpose would be served if the matter is transferred to the Court at Bhupalpally. He further contended that when the contention of petitioner is that she is unable to attend the Court, petition-er undertakes to examine the witnesses on the same day and he also undertakes to pay the travelling charges of the witnesses including the petitioner herein. Once the evidence is completed the next stage is arguments and petitioner is not at all required at that stage, even if, petitioner wants to attend the Court, respondent will pay the travelling charges including her stay. As such, requested the Court to dismiss this transfer petition.

6. In this regard learned counsel for the respondent relied on the judgment in Anindita Das Vs Srijit Dasr , wherein in paragraph Nos.3 and 4, the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed as under : "3. Even otherwise, it must be seen that at one stage this Court was showing leniency to ladies. But since then it has been found that a large number of tralsfer petitions are filed by women taking advantage of the leniency shown by this Court. On aI average at least 10 to 15 transfer petitions are on board of each court on each admission day. It is, therefore, I (2006) 9 Supreme Court Cases 197 { :';a \ I 5 c13ar' lrirt leniency of this Court is being misused bv the

4.'l'lris (ourt is now required to consider each petiticn or its mer I Ir this case the ground taken by the wif,: is hat she hzLs r srall chiid and that fhere is nobody to keep h:r clild Tlre c r ll, in this case, is six years old and tl err- iu-r: gran 1p,: 13n15 available to look after the child. Th,: resoorld:nt is uilLir 1; to pay all expenses for travel and stal, of Lhe petit orr:r and her companion for every visit $lren Lhe petil,on,J is required to attend the court at Delhi. Tlrus, _hc gr'rurrri hat the petitioner has no source o. in(ome rs adec, ri: t -'J met."

7. Cr>n sr:Jsring the submissions made by both the counsel and thc nral( I ial on record, this transfer petition is lller I stating that pet,ti:xtr r is residing along with her parents at ped,lapur of Bhupalpal 11. t)istrict and she is taking care ol he r tl ree and half-year rrlt:l ::hild, as such, she cannot atterrd the (lourt at Hyderabarl . l'he further contention of pel irioner is that responder.l : attending the Court in the matte rs l,ertz ining to DVC, M(l rtr I Section 498-A IpC cases filed b.,. rh: pe titioner. Therefor,r, il the F.C.O.p., is transferred to l)hu raLpelly, no prejudict: ,r 1 be caused to the respondent anc i t rvi11 be convenient 1ir - rhc petitioner also. However, ttre rt.corr t shows that in F'Clr, trial is aiready commenced and the evioence of petitioner is rircady completed. On behalf of restr)onc ent ten 6 n witnesses were cited, Rws.1 to 3 were examined, the evidence of Rw.4 was eschewed and Rw.5 was partly examined However' the respondent undertakes to examine all the witnesses on the same day and he is also ready to pay Batta for the witnesses and also willing to pay travelling charges for the petitioner' Further the case is at the fag end and except the ground of inconvenience there are no other grounds to allow this petition' Hence, the transfer petition is Iiable to be dismissed'

8. Accordingly, the Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is dismissed. However, the respondent is directed to pay batta to the witnesses and also the charges as decided by the trial Court to the petitioner herein on the date of her appearance' No costs' Miscellaneous applications, if any pending' shall stand closed. : i To, //TRUE COPY// SD/. T.TIRUMALA DEVI EPUTY REGISTRAR SECTION OFFICER l

1. The Judge, lAdditional Family Court, City Civil Court at Hyderabad Z. fne Oistiict Judge, Bhupalpalh District at Bhupalpally S. On" CC to SRI ttltOUO SROTO ALl, Advocate [OPUC] +. On" CC to SRI R S SRAVAN KUMAR, Advocate [OPUC] 5. Two CD CoPies ry. ADK/gh HIGH COUIIT DATED:07110412025 J ORDER TRCMP.No.506 ot 2024 ,4': -i r.1 i j r, rr- (n( 2o,m l[E !. :.: ti) L ,,, .\. DISMISSING THE TRCMP wlTHouT cr)sirs 1 b ,lt I