Telangana High Court
Ega Chapale Purnima vs Sri Ega Naveen on 18 July, 2025
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY
TRANSFER CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No. 65 of 2025
ORDER:
This Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed seeking transfer of HMOP.No.53 of 2024 pending on the file of the Senior Civil Judge Court, Nizamabad at Nizamabad District, to Family Court, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar.
2. Heard Sri V.V.Ramana Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner. Though, Sri A.Sanjeeva Reddy, learned counsel, entered appearance on behalf of the respondent and filed counter, there is no representation. Therefore, the matter is disposed of basing on material available on record.
3. The brief facts of the case, shorn-off unnecessary details, required for adjudication of this Tr.C.M.P., are that the petitioner and respondent are wife and husband and their marriage was performed on 10.03.2023 at Sumangali Function Hall, IB Thandur, Mancherial District, as per Hindu rites and customs; that the respondent is working in the company situated at Somajiguda, Hyderabad, as software engineer and residing in a Hostel at Ameerpet, Hyderabad; that petitioner is an employee in the Commercial- Tax Department, R.R.District; that both used to lead their marital life at native place of respondent in the weekends; that respondent's brother took LNA, J TrCMP.No.65 of 2025 2 a house at Doctor's colony, Saroornagar; and that both petitioner and respondent started staying in the said house along with respondent's brother and his wife; that since then differences and disputes arose between them; and that respondent, his brother and his wife started harassing the petitioner, physically and verbally for additional dowry; that petitioner was subjected to continuous harassment, therefore, the petitioner started living separately at Hyderabad.
4. It is further averred that the respondent filed HMOP.No.53 of 2024 before the Senior Civil Judge at Nizamabad for divorce; that the petitioner unable to bear the harassment, filed complaint and FIR.No.32/2025 in WPS(Rachakonda), Saroornagar, R.R.Distrct was registered under Sections 498-A of IPC, under Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act. It is further averred that the petitioner is presently working as Junior Assistant in Commercial Tax Department, Ranga Reddy District, and the distance between Ranga Reddy District to Nizamabad is about 200 kms.; that she cannot travel alone, all the way from Hyderabad to Nizamabad; that the respondent is also residing at Hyderabad and therefore, it is convenient for both the parties, if HMOP.No.53 of 2024 is transferred from Nizamabad to the Family Court, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar. Hence, present Tr.CMP is filed.
LNA, J TrCMP.No.65 of 2025 3
5. Learned Counsel for the petitioner apart from reiterating the averments made in the affidavit submitted that respondent is working in a Software Company situated at Somajiguda, Hyderabad; that in fact he is residing at Hyderabad, however, HMOP is filed at Nizamabad, only to harass the petitioner. He further submits that petitioner is working as Junior Assistant in Commercial Tax Department, R.R.District, therefore, it is convenient for petitioner as well as respondent, if the HMOP is transferred from Nizamabad to Family Court at R.R.District. Thus, prayed to allow the Tr.CMP.
6. In the counter filed by the respondent it is admitted that the petitioner is working as Junior Assistant in Commercial Tax Department, R.R.District; and that it is also admitted that the petitioner is residing at Meerpet, Hyderabad.
7. It is relevant to refer to the underlying principle governing the proceedings under Section 24 of the CPC seeking transfer of the case, appeal or other proceedings, which is enunciated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in a catena of judgments and the same was followed by various High Courts.
LNA, J TrCMP.No.65 of 2025 4
8. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in NCV Aishwarya Vs. A.S.Saravana Karthik Sha 1 held as follows:
" The cardinal principle for exercise of power under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure is that the ends of justice should demand the transfer of the suit, appeal or other proceeding. In matrimonial matters, wherever Courts are called upon to consider the plea of transfer, the Courts have to take into consideration the economic soundness of both the parties, the social strata of the spouses and their behavioural pattern, their standard of life prior to the marriage and subsequent thereto and the circumstances of both the parties in eking out their livelihood and under whose protective umbrella they are seeking their sustenance to life. Given the prevailing socio- economic paradigm in the Indian society, generally, it is the wife's convenience which must be looked at while considering transfer."
9. The principle of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in N.C.V.Aishwarya's case (3rd cited supra), has been reiterated by the High Court of Bombay in Devika Dhiraj Patil Nee Devika Jayprakash Buttepatil v. Dhiraj Sunil Patil2, and observed as under:-
"In a country like India, important decisions such as marriage, divorce are still taken with the guidance and blessings of elders in the family. For a lady to travel alone for the proceedings to a Court where the fate of her marriage is going to be decided without any family 1 2022 SCC Online SC 1199 2 (2023 SCC OnLine Bom 1926) LNA, J TrCMP.No.65 of 2025 5 member would definitely be a matter of concern and cause not only physical inconvenience but also emotional and psychological inconvenience."
10. Further, the High Court of Bombay in Priyanka Rahul Patil v. Rahul Ravindra Patil 3 followed the principle laid down in N.C.V.Aishwarya's case (3rd cited supra) and Devika Dhiraj Patil Nee Devika Jayprakash Buttepatil's case (4th cited supra), and held as follows:-
"The underlying principle governing the proceedings under Section 24 of the CPC, is that convenience of the wife is to be preferred over the convenience 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 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.
12. A perusal of record would disclose that HMOP.53 of 2024 filed by the respondent for divorce is pending before the Senior Civil Judge at Nizamabad; that the petitioner is working as Junior Assistant, 3 (2023 SCC OnLine Bom 1982) LNA, J TrCMP.No.65 of 2025 6 Commercial Tax Department at R.R.District; and that she is residing at Meerpet, Hyderabad. Further, the distance between R.R.District to Nizamabad is about 200 Kms.; that since the petitioner is alone at Hyderabad, she cannot travel all the way from R.R.District to Nizamabad; and that no family member is there to accompany her to attend the Court proceedings in HMOP. Therefore, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioner made out a case for transfer of HMOP.No.53 of 2024 from the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Nizamabad to the Family Court, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.nagar.
13. For the foregoing reasons and further, in view of the underlying principle enunciated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and various other High Courts in the aforesaid Judgments that the convenience of the wife has to be given priority/preference over the convenience of the husband, this Court finds that the grounds urged by the petitioner seeking transfer of the HMOP are justifiable and therefore, this Tr.CMP deserves to be allowed.
14. Accordingly, this Tr.C.M.P. is allowed and HMOP.No.53 of 2024, pending on the file of the Senior Civil Judge Court, Nizamabad, is transferred to the Family Court, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar, for disposal in accordance with law.
LNA, J TrCMP.No.65 of 2025 7
15. The Senior Civil Judge Court, Nizamabad, shall transmit the entire original record in HMOP.No.53 of 2024, duly indexed, to the Family court, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar, preferably within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
__________________________________ LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY, J Date: 18.07.2025 tk