Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Mudavath Kavitha vs A.S.Saravana Karthik Sha^ He Prays To ... on 4 July, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI
THURSDAY ,THE FOURTH DAY OF JULY
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE BANDARU SYAMSUNDER
TRANS. CIVIL MISC.PETITION NO: 58 OF 2024
Between:
Mudavath Kavitha, W/o Mudavath Baji syda Naik, Occupation House wife,
aged about 24 years, House wife, R/o Natu Baburao Park, Santhapeta,
Ongole, Prakasam District.
...Petitioner
AND
Mudavath Baji Syda Naik, S/o Chinna Balu Naik, Occupation Coolee, aged
about 27 years, R/o 1-67, Goli VilJage, Rentachitala Mandal, Palnadau
District.
...Respondent
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 the H.M.O.P.No.268 of 2023 on the file of Senior Civil
Judge, Gurazala, Palnadu District and transfer the same to Senior Civil
Judge, Ongole.
lA 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 H.M.O.P.No.268 of 2023 on the
, file of the Honourable Senior CivilJudge, Gurajala.
lA NO: 2 OF 2024
Between:
Mudavath Kavitha, W/o Mudavath Baji syda Naik, Occupation House wife,
aged about 24 years, House wife, R/o Natu Baburao Park, Santhapeta,
Ongole, Prakasam District.
...Petitioner
AND
Mudavath Baji Syda Naik, S/o Chinha Balu Naik, Occupation Cooleei aged
about 27 years, R/o 1-67, Goli Village, Rentachitala Mandal, Palnadau
District.
...Respondent
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 vacate the operation of the extension of interim stay order
granted on 20.06.2024 in I.A. No. 1 of 2024 in Tr.CMP. No. 58 of 2024,
pending disposal of the Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition -
Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI KANCHARLAPALLI SIVA RAMA PRASAD
Counsel for the Respondent: SRI V V S S SRIKANTH G
The Court made the following order:
APHC010115892024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3366]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
THURSDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF JULY
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE B SYAMSUNDER
TRANS. CIVIL MISC.PETITION NO: 58/2024
Between:
Mudavath Kavitha ...PETITIONER
AND
...RESPONDENT
Mudavath Baji Syda Naik
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1 .KANCHARLA PALLl SIVA RAMA PRASAD
Counsel for the Respondent:
1.VVSSSR1KANTHG
The Court made the following:
2
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTiCE B SYAMRI iMnPP
Tr.C.M.P. No.58 OF 2024
ORDER:
I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. Kancharla Palli Siva Rama Prasad as well as learned counsel for the respondent Mr. V V S S SrIkanth.G, at length.
2. This is wife's petition under Section 24 of Code of Civil Procedure (in short C.P.C), seeking transfer of H.M.O.P No.268 of 2023 from Senior Civil Judge Court, Gurazala, Guntur Judicial District to Senior Civil Judge Court, Ongole Judicial District, on the ground that now she is residing in her parents' house at Ongole whero she already lodged a report before SHO, Women Police Station, Ongole against the respondent for dowry harassment wherein after due investigation SHO filed charge sheet vide C.C.No.296 of 2020 on the file of II Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class Ongole. The petitioner submits that respondent has filed H.M.O.P No.268 of 2023 before the Senior Civil Judge Court, Gurazala with false grounds.
3. The main contention of the petitioner is that she being a lady has no male support and her mother is suffering from ill-health, who is working as sweeper in the village, it is difficult for her to attend before Senior Civil Judge Court, Guruzala on each and every adjournment and she cannot bear travel and stay expenses as the distance between Ongole to Gurazala is 153 Kms and prays to allow the petition.
34. The respondent filed counter-affidavit denying averments in the affidavit of the petitioner. It is the contention of the respondent that marriage between the petitioner and respondent solemnized on 27.04.2018 in a temple at Gurazala town and both have resided at Goli Village and petitioner has stayed in matrimonial home only for a week and she expressed that her marriage with him was performed against her will, as respondent is working as a coolie and left for her parents' house.
5 7he respondent submits that the marriage between the parties solemnized within the territorial jurisdiction of Senior Civil Judge Court.
Gurazala and both have resided at Gurazala and he is working as a coolie, due to that he cannot bear travel and stay expenses to travel to Ongole, if the request of the petitioner to transfer the case is considered. It is also the contention of the respondent that he is having threat when he attends the Court at Ongole, as uncle of the petitioner tried to intimidate him, when he was attending the Court at Ongole. He prays to dismiss the petition.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that now the petitioner is residing in her parents' house at Ongole, having no male support and no source of income to bear travel and stay expenses to attend the Court at Gurazala. He would further submit that petitioner already lodged a report before the SHO, Women Police Station, Ongole on 23.09.2019, wherein the SHO after due investigation filed charge-sheet against respondent and others vide C.C.No.296 of 2020 on the file of 11 Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Ongole. It is the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner that 4 when respondent is already appearing before the Courts at Ongole in criminal case, it may not be difficult for him to attend before Senior Civil Judge Court, Ongole, if transfer petition filed by the petitioner is transferred from Senior Civil Judge Court, Gurazala to Senior Civil Judge Court, Ongole. He also relied on the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court ini N C.V. Aishwarya Vs, A.S.Saravana Karthik Sha^ He prays to allow the petition.
7. The learned counsel for the respondent would submit that the respondent is working as a Coolie and marriage is also solemnized between the parties within the territorial jurisdiction of Gurazala and both have lastly resided at Goli village of Gurazala Court jurisdiction. He would further submit that as per the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in catena of decisions, in matrimonial disputes conciliation has to be conducted for which both parties have to appear before the Court where the case is pending and after that parties have to proceed with enquiry, if conciliation failed. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the respondent that respondent is having threat in the hands of uncle of the petitioner, due to that respondent is not in a position to attend before the Senior Civil Judge Court. Ongole and if request of the petitioner to transfer the case is considered, it will cause more hardship to respondent. He prays to dismiss the petition.
8. A perusal of records, which shows that marriage of the petitioner and the respondent solemnized on 27.04.2018 in a temple at Gurazala town of Guntur Judicial district. as per Hindu rites and customs prevailing in their ^2022 LiveLaw (SC) 627 5 community. The contention of the respondent is that petitioner stayed in matrimonial home for a short period and then left to her parents' house by expressing that her marriage is performed against her will as she does not want to marry the respondent, who is working as a coolie.
9. Admittedly, petitioner lodged a report against the respondent and others on 23.09.2019 before SHO, Ongole Women Police Station for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A r/w 34 I PC and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, wherein SHO after due investigation filed charge-sheet vide C.C.No.296 of 2020 on the file of II Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Ongole.
10. The teamed counsel for the petitioner would submit that the said case is coming for examination of accused, wherein the respondent and others are appearing before the Courts at Ongole. It is no doubt true that in every family before dispute law mandates conducting conciliation between parties proceeding for enquiry which has to be done by the Court where matrimonial or family disputes are pending. But, question in the present petition is whether there are grounds to consider the request of the petitioner to transfer divorce petition filed by respondent from Senior Civil Judge Court, Gurazala town to Ongole city, where nov\/ she is residing and where C.C.No.296 of 2020 is pending. In those circumstances, the Hon'ble Apex Court while considering the similar contention and petition under Section 24 of Code of Civil Procedure 6 in N.C.V. Aishwarya Vs. A.S.Saravana Karthik Sha^') referred supra held at Paragraph Nos.9 and 10 as under:
9.The cardinal principles 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 of life. Given the prevailing socioeconomic paradigm in the Indian society, generally, it is the wife's convenience which must be looked at while considering transfer.10.
Further, when two or more proceedings are pending in different Courts between the same parties which raise common question of fact and law, and when the decisions in the cases are interdependent, it is desirable that they should be tried together by the same Judge so as to avoid multiplicity in trial of the same Issues and conflict of decisions. "
11. The learned counsel for the respondent has relied on the ratio laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in Santhini/petitioner vs. Vijaya Venketesh/respondent^), with regard to factors to be considered while considering the transfer petitions. A perusal of ratio laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in the said decision, this Court cannot direct to conduct the Video Conferencing of proceedings in the family disputes and it is for the Court where the C.C is pending has to conduct counseling between the parties before proceeding with the enquiry in the petition.
^2022 LiveLaw (SC) 627 ^ AIR 2017 SC 5745 7
12. Though, criminal case pending against the respondent and divorce petition filed by the respondent cannot be decided by the same Court, the fact remains is that petitioner lodged a report against the respondent for dowry harassment in the year 2019 itself, wherein after due investigation, charge-
sheet also filed in the year 2020 itself and thereafter, respondent/husband filed petition seeking for divorce before Senior Civil Judge Court, Gurazala in the year 2023, wherein also he stated about filing of criminal case against him by the petitioner. The respondent has to appear before the Court of II Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class Court, Ongole in C.C.No.296 of 2020 to put forth his defence, if any. When respondent has to appear before the Court at Ongole, it is convenient for both the parties to appear before Court at Ongole, if divorce petition filed by the respondent is transferred from Senior Civil Judge Court, Gurazala to Family Court, Ongole, as the petitioner is said to be residing within Ongole Municipal Corporation limits.
13. As per Family Courts Act and in view of the provisions in Hindu !i-
Marriage Act, Court where matrimonial dispute is pending has to conduct counseling or conciliation between the parties before proceeding with enquiry, as per procedure laid down under law.
14. This Court is of an opinion that there are grounds to consider the request of the petitioner to transfer H.M.O.P No.268 of 2023 from Senior Civil Judge Court, Gurazala, Guntur Judicial District to Family Court, Ongole.
815. In the result, petition is allowed. The H.M.O.P No.268 of 2023, on the file of Senior Civil Judge Court, Gurazala, Guritur Judicial District is hereby withdrawn and transferred to Family Court, Ongole. The learned Judge, Senior Civil Judge Court, Gurazala, Guntur Judicial District shall transmit the case records in H.M.O.P No.268 of 2023 to Family Court, Ongole, duly indexed, as expeditiously as possible, within a period of two (02) weeks, from the date of receipt of order of this Court in the present petition. Both parties shall appear before Family Court, Ongole, on 09.08.2024 at 10.30 am. The learned Judge, Family Court, Ongole, shall not insist physical presence of the respondent for each and every adjournment before the Court, if he engages a counsel and he can insist his presence as and when required or at the time of recording his evidence before the Court. No order as to costs.
Consequently, miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. The interim stay granted if any, shall stand vacated.
SO/- K J RAJA BABU ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To
1. The Senior Civil Judge, Gurazala, Guntur Judicial District.
2. The Judge, Family. Court, Ongole, Prakasam District.
3. One CC to Sri Kancharla Palli Siva Rama Prasad,,Advocate [OPUC]
4. One CC to Sri VV S S Srikanth G., Advocate [OPUC]
5. Mudavath Kavitha, W/o Mudavath Baji Syda Naik House wife, R/o Natu Baburao Park, Santhapeta, Ongole, Prakasam District. (by RPAD)
6. Mudavath Baji Syda Naik, S/o Chinna Balu Naik, R/o 1 1-67, Goli Village, Rentachitala Mandal, Painadau District, (by RPAD)
7. Three CD Copies SM sree J * HIGH COURT DATED:04/07/2024 Petitioner & Respondent shall appear before Family Court, Ongole on 09.08.2024 at 10:30 am V ORDER i • TRCMP.No.58 of 2024 ALLOWING THE TR.C.M.P. WITHOUT COSTS .,1-