APHC010365422024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3397]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
TUESDAY ,THE TWENTY NINETH DAY OF OCTOBER
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENUTHURUMALLI GOPALA
KRISHNA RAO
TRANS. CIVIL MISC.PETITION NO: 277/2024
Between:
Guduru @ Guduri @ Kuchipudi Bhagyalakshmi @ Chinnari ...PETITIONER
Chinni
AND
Guduru Guduri Ashok Kumar ...RESPONDENT
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. B.SUDHAKAR KUMAR
Counsel for the Respondent:
1. BALA DASTAGIRI P
The Court made the following:
ORDER:
The petitioner/wife filed the present petition under Section 24 of the
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, seeking to withdraw O.P.No.59 of 2023 on the
file of the VII Additional District Judge, Peddapuram, East Godavari and
transfer the same to the District Judge Court, Guntur, Guntur District.
2. The case of the petitioner in brief is as follows:
I. The petitioner is the legally wedded wife of the respondent and their
marriage was performed at Guntur District on 29.12.2008. In view of the
matrimonial disputes between both the parties, the petitioner/wife is
Guntur. The petitioner pleaded that she
staying at her parents’ house at
had lodged a complaint before the Disha Urban Police Station, Guntur
under section 498-A, 506, 509 IPC and the same was numbered as
C.C.No.1259 of 2023 on the file of the V Additional Judicial
Magistrate of First Class at Guntur and the same is pending for
adjudication. The petitioner pleaded that to cause inconvenience to her,
the respondent/husband had filed O.P.No.59 of 2023 on the file of the
VII Additional District Judge, Peddapuram, East Godavari, under
Section 32 of the Indian Divorce Act, 1872 seeking restitution of
conjugal rights.
II. Learned counsel for the petitioner further contended that the petitioner
being a woman, depending upon her parents, it is very difficult for her to
travel at a distance of approximately 250Kms from Guntur to
Peddapuram without any male support and that she was constrained to
file the present petition against the respondent/husband seeking to
withdraw O.P.No.59 of 2023 on the file of the VII Additional District
Judge, Peddapuram, East Godavari and transfer the same to the
District Judge Court, Guntur, Guntur District.
3. Heard Sri B.Sudhakar Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri
Bala Dastagiri.P, learned counsel for the respondent and perused the
material available on record.
4. The respondent/husband has filed a counter affidavit and Sri Bala
Dastagiri.P, learned counsel for the respondent has represented that there are
no bonafides on the part of the petitioner/wife to file the present Transfer
Petition seeking to transfer O.P.No.59 of 2023 on the file of the VII Additional
District Judge, Peddapuram, East Godavari to the District Judge Court,
Guntur, Guntur District.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the
respondent/husband herein is a practicing Advocate at Guntur and per contra
the learned counsel for the respondent has contended that the respondent
herein is a practicing advocate at Rajahmundry and admitted that the
respondent/husband is an advocate.
6. The Apex Court in a case of N.C.V. Aishwarya Vs A.S.Saravana
1
Karthik Sha held as follows:
1
2022 LiveLaw (SC) 627
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
appearing for both sides and in view of the ratio laid down in the aforesaid
case law 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/wife to withdraw O.P.No.59 of 2023 on the file of the VII
Additional District Judge, Peddapuram, East Godavari and transfer the same
to the District Judge Court, Guntur, Guntur District. Further, the personal
attendance of the respondent herein i.e. the petitioner in O.P.No.59 of 2023
on the file of the VII Additional District Judge, Peddapuram, East Godavari,
has been dispensed with before the transferee Court i.e., the District Court,
Guntur, except on the days when his presence is required as per law.
8. In the result, the present petition is allowed and O.P.No.59 of 2023 on
the file of the VII Additional District Judge, Peddapuram, East Godavari, is
hereby withdrawn and transferred to the District Court, Guntur. The VII
Additional District Judge, Peddapuram, East Godavari, shall transmit the case
record in O.P.No.59 of 2023 to the Family Court, Guntur, duly indexed as
expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of two (02) weeks from the
date of receipt of a copy of the order. Further, the personal attendance of the
respondent herein i.e. the petitioner in O.P.No.59 of 2023 on the file of the VII
Additional District Judge, Peddapuram, East Godavari, has been dispensed
with before the transferee Court i.e., the District Court, Guntur, except on the
days when his presence is required as per law. Both the parties are directed
to appear before the District Court, Guntur on 20.12.2024, at 10.30 a.m. 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: 29.10.2024
SRT