Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Tirunagaram Sri Devi vs Tirunagaram Sanjeev Mangesh on 11 December, 2024
1
APHC010384852024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3397]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
WEDNESDAY ,THE ELEVENTH DAY OF DECEMBER
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENUTHURUMALLI GOPALA
KRISHNA RAO
TRANS. CIVIL MISC.PETITION NO: 291/2024
Between:
Tirunagaram Sri Devi ...PETITIONER
AND
Tirunagaram Sanjeev Mangesh ...RESPONDENT
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. YASWANTH GADE
Counsel for the Respondent:
1. RAVITEJA PADIRI
The Court made the following:
2
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V.GOPALA KRISHNA RAO
TRANSFER CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.291 of 2024
ORDER:
The petitioner/wife filed the present petition under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, seeking to withdraw F.C.O.P.No.1741 of 2023 on the file of the XIV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Vijayawada, NTR District and transfer to the Court of the Senior Civil Judge, Narsapuram, West Godavari District.
2. The case of the petitioner in brief is as follows:
(i) The petitioner is none other than the wife of the respondent and in view of the matrimonial disputes in between the petitioner and the respondent, the petitioner is residing at her parents' house at Narsapuram, West Gadavari Judicial District.
(ii) The petitioner further pleaded that she also filed a case under Section 498-A IPC at Narsapur and the same is pending for investigation.
(iii) She further pleaded that to cause inconvenience to her, her husband filed the F.C.O.P.No.1741 of 2023 before the Family Court at Vijayawada seeking dissolution of the marriage.
(iv) The petitioner further pleaded that the distance in between the Narsapuram and Vijayawada is approximately 145Kms without any male assistance, and she is unable to travel at a distance of 145Kms 3 to Vijayawada to appear before the Family Court at Vijayawada and that she is constrained to file this application.
3. Heard Sri G.Yaswanth, learned counsel for the petitioner.
4. Learned counsel for the respondent appeared through virtual mode and submitted that she filed counter affidavit before the Registry and the same is placed on record. Learned counsel for the respondent would contend that the respondent is a software employee in United States and his father is representing on behalf of son, who is aged about 73 years and staying at Vizianagaram. It is very difficult for the G.P.A. holder since he is more than 70 years old to appear before the Narsapuram on each and every adjournment before the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Narsapuram and that she would further contend that there are no grounds to consider the application filed by the petitioner.
5. The Apex Court in a case of Geeta Heera Vs Harish Chander Heera1, held by considering the fact that - "if a wife does not have sufficient funds to visit the place where the divorce petition is filed by her husband, then the transfer petition filed by the wife may be allowed."
6. The Apex Court in a case of N.C.V. Aishwarya Vs A.S.SaravanaKarthikSha2 held as follows:
1
(2000) 10 SCC 304 2 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 627 4 "9. 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."
7. On considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and in view of the ratio laid down by the Apex Court in the aforesaid case laws that in matrimonial proceedings, the convenience of the wife has to be considered than that of the inconvenience of the husband. Therefore, this Court is of the considered view that there are grounds to consider the request of the petitioner to transfer the F.C.O.P.No.1741 of 2023 on the file of the XIV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Vijayawada, NTR District to the Court of the Senior Civil Judge, Narsapuram West Godavari District.
8. Furthermore, the husband is staying in U.S. and he is an employee and considering the submissions made by leaned counsel for the respondent that the G.P.A. holder, aged about 70years, is representing his son, therefore, his personal appearance before the Transferee Court i.e., the Court of the Senior Civil Judge, Narsapuram, West Godavari Judicial District has been dispensed with, except on the days when the personal 5 appearance of the petitioner in F.C.O.P.No.1741 of 2023 is required as per law.
9. With the above observations, the Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is allowed and the F.C.O.P.No.1741 of 2023 on the file of the XIV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Vijayawada, NTR District is hereby withdrawn and transferred to the Court the Senior Civil Judge, Narsapuram, West Godavari Judicial District. The learned XIV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Vijayawada shall transmit the case record in F.C.O.P.No.1741 of 2023 to the Court of Senior Civil Judge, Narsapuram, duly indexed as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of two (02) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
10. The personal appearance of the respondent i.e. the petitioner in F.C.O.P.No.1741 of 2023, before the Court of the Senior Civil Judge, Narsapuram, West Godavari Judicial District is dispensed with, except on the days when his personal appearance is required as per law. There shall be no order as to costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending and the Interim order granted earlier, if any, shall stand closed.
_______________________________ JUSTICE V.GOPALA KRISHNA RAO Date: 11.12.2024 Pnr