Thota alias Sudula Radhika v. Thota Venu alias Bhikshapathi

:SRI. M MADHAVA REDDY : NONE APPEARED The Court made the following : ORDER I 1 l I t I I I i l I I i i i i ! , I l ! HON'BIE SRI IUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA AI,ISHETTY Tr.C. M.P.No.53 9 of2024 ORDER: This Transfer Civil Miscellaneous petition is fikrd seeking transfer of O.p.No.192 of 2023from the file of the Jucll;e, Family Court, Hanumakonda, filed by the respondent-hur;band, to the Court of the Senior Civil Judge, Jangaon.

2. Heard Sri M. Madhava Reddy, learned corrnsei for the petitioner. Dcspite service of notice, none appeared on behalf of the responden t.

3. The brief facts leading to filing of the present .I.r.(_.M.p. that the marriage of the petitioner-wife was sorem.ir:ed with the respondent-h usband on 10.02.2012 at Sharada Fur.rcii,rn Hall, Hanumakoncla, as per the prevailing customs in Hinrlu lteiigion. After marriage, respondent and the petitioner read treir maritar life happily for four years. Later, the respondent started h,rrassing the petitioner mentally and physically. Or", 10.0,).2015, the respondent necked out the petitioner from his hous<r ard since then the petitioner is residing with her parents. 1". l\' 2 I.NA. J Tr.CMP.No.539 of2024

4. V{hile things stood thus' the respondent filed O'P'No'192 of 2023, before the ]udge, Family Court at Hanumakonda' under Section 13(1)(ia)&(ib) of Hindu Marriage Act' 1955 for dissolution of Marriage and the same is pending for adjudication'

5. The petitioner filed Cr1'M'P' No' 1162 of 2024 in M'C' No'28 of 2l23before Additional ]udicial First Class Magistrate' jangaory and the same is pending for adjudication lt is further stated that in view of strained relationship between the petitioner and the respondent, it is dilficult to attend the O'P No'192 of 2023 for each and every hearing' Hence, prayed to trahsfer O'P'No'192 of 2023 to Senior Civil Judge, |angaon'

6. This Court considered the submissions made by learned counsel for petitioner' Perused the material available on record.

7. The underlying principle governing the proceedings under SectionLl of the CPC seeking transfer of the case' appeal or other'proceedings' is enunciated by the Hon'ble =.w 3 Tr.C,WP.\o.539 of2024 LNA, J Supreme Court in a catena of judgments and t.he same was followed b1.t arious High Courts. 8 The l{on'ble Supreme Court in NCV Aishzoarya Vs. A.S.Saraoana Karthik Shal heldas follows: "9. The cartlinnl principle for erercise of pouter unrler Srt:tion 24 of tle Cofui oI Cioil procedure is that tfu ends of justice shoutd deruant] thc trans.fer of the suit, appeal or otfur procet rling. In tnntrinLotunl nmtLers, ulrcreoer Courts are called ttpon to consider the pLen ol trnns.fer, tlu Courts hatte to take into con:;idt,mtton the econornit sortndness of both the pnrtbs, tlu socinl strato of the spouses nnd their behaoioural pnttern, tllgir standard tf liJz pior to tlte marri.tge nnd subsequent thereto and the circumslanr..t,s of both tlrc pnrtit's irr eking out their. lizteLihood and under zuhrtss Ttysts(:fipg umbreLla tlrtl nre seeking their sustenanci to life. Gilen tle preznilitrg socio- economic paratligm in the Indian socie\, SetteraLly, it is the. utife's conuenience zohich must be looked nt ruhih; ctrtsidering trnnsfer,"

9. The principle of law laid down by the Hon,ble fiupreme Court in N.C.V.Aishwarya,s case (2od cited supra), has been reiterated by the High Court of Bombay in Deaika Lthhaj patil I ' zoz2 SCC Online SC 1199 j I l : i I I l I i I I : 4 LNA' J C Tr.CMP.No.539 of2024 Nee Deaika fayprukash Buttepatil tt' Dhirai Sunil Patilz' and observed as under:- "ln a country like lndia, important decisions such as marriage, diztotce are still taken tttith tlt guidance and blessings of elders in the t'amily' For t lady to trmtel alone for the proceedings to a Court where the t'ate oJ her mariage is going to be decided without any t'amily member toould definitely be a matter of concern and ctuse not onty physicat inconttenience but also emotional and psychologicnl inconuenience , l0.Further,theHighCourtofBombayinPilyankaRahul Patil o. Rahul Raoindra Patils followed the principle laid down in N.C.V.Aishwarya's case (2^a cited supra) and Deoika Dhiraj Patil Nee Deoika layptakash Btfttepatil's case (3'd cited supra)' and held as follows:- "Tfu underlying pinciple gooerning the ptoceedings under Section of thz CPC, is that conaenience of the roife is to be preferred otter the comenience of the husband'"

11. Thus, there are catena of decisions of the Hon ble Supreme Court and other High Courts to the effect that in while consid ering the aPplication matrimonial matrers/ disPutes' .a- 2 (2023 scc online Bom 1925) : i2oz3 scc onune Bom 1982) 1 t t 5 TT.CMP ,\t.539 of 2024 LNA, J for transfer of the proceedings from one Court to ano ther Courf the Courts mus t prefer the convenience of the wifrt over the convenience of tl-re husband

12. In the presen! case, a perusal of the record disr:loses that the petitiorrer is seeking transfer of the O.I,. file,l by the respondent from the Judge, Family Court, Hanumakon ja, on the ground that she cannot attend the court on each and every date of adjournment. Further, for every hearing, she has to take assistance from her family members. The Crl.M.p. IrIr.1162 of 2024 in M.C. No.2g of 2023 filed by the p6titioner for enf,)rcement of the order of maintenance is pending before the A,lditional ]udicial MagisLrate of First Class, Jangaon and respor.rdr: rt has to attend the M.C case at Jangaon. Whereas, O.p.No.192 of j2123 filed by the resporrdent for dissolution of marriage, is pendin3 before Judge, Family Cour! Hanumakonda. Therefore, there lr.ould not be inconvenience to respondent if the O.p.No .792 ol 2023 is transferred to fangaon.

13. Therefore, in view of the underlying principle enr:nciated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and various other High Courts in t l l I I I I I l l I ) I I 6 LNA' J n h.CMP.No 539 of 2021 the aforesaid judgments that the convenie-nce of dre petitioner/wi{e has to be given priority/ preference over the convenience of the respondent/husband' this Transfer CMP deserves to be allowed '14. Accordingly, this Transfer C'M'P' is allowed and o.P.No.192 of 2023 pending on the file of }udge, Family Court at Hanumakonda, is withdrawn and transferred to the Senior Civil Judge, Jangaon, for disposal in accordance with law' 15. The learned Judge' Family Court' Hanumakonda' shall hansmit the entire original record in O'P'No'192 of 2023 duly indexed, to the Court of the Senior Civil judge' Jangaoo preferably within a period of one (01) month from the date of receipt of a coPY of this order' Pending miscellaneous applications' 1t any ' shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs. //TRUE COPY// SD/- MOHD. ISMAIL D PUTY REGISTRAR ECTION OFFICER To, I

1. The Court of the Judge, Family Court, Hanumakonda' 2. The Courtof the Senior Civil Judge, Jangaon, Hanumakonda District 3. One CC to SRl. M MADHAVA REDDY, Advocate [OPUC] 4. Two CD CoPies Pc-sd/gh HIGH COURT DATED:18 tO3tZOZs I rE $ivI/'l () * 10 ,Ut 2025 '. i '.: ll *,,.'/ ORDER TRCMP.No.539 of 2024 I I I I i I I I I I 1 / I I I I I ALLOWING THE TRANSFER CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION 6 )r 1