Allowed

R Madhu Harshitha Singh v. R Jitendra Singh

Andhra Pradesh HC9 Jan 2024TRCMP/223/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Wife sought transfer of her husband's divorce petition from Kavali to Sri Kalahasthi citing ill health and other pending cases there. Court noted respondent already attends court at Sri Kalahasthi for two pending cases and allowed the transfer.

What did the court decide?

H.M.O.P No.76 of 2022 transferred from Senior Civil Judge Court, Kavali to Senior Civil Judge Court, Sri Kalahasthi; records within two weeks; no costs.

R Madhu Harshitha Singh Vs R Jitendra Singh — Domestic Violence | Andhra Pradesh HC (2024)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE BANDARU SYAMSUNDER

¶2

TRANSFER CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION

¶3

NO.223 OF 2023

¶4

ORDER:

¶5

I have heard learned counsel, Mr. M.R.K Chakravarthy representing on behalf of Mr. Bhagat Singh Kowru, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel, Mr. D. Uma Maheswara Rao, representing Mr.G.Vivekanand, learned counsel for the respondent.

¶6

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.76 of 2022 on the file of Senior Civil Judge Court, Kavali, Nellore District to Senior Civil Judge Court, Sri Kalahasthi, on the ground that now she is residing at Sri Kalahasthi and she is suffering from ill health and where she already filed a report before SHO, Sri Kalahasthi police station, against the respondent for dowry harassment and also filed DVC No. 17 of 2022. The petitioner submits that the respondent having knowledge about her ill health, as she is not in a position to travel to Kavali, filed H.M.O.P No. 76 of 2022 for dissolution of marriage with false and baseless allegations. She prays to allow the petition.

¶7

¶8

BSS, J Tr.C.M.P.No.223 of 2024

¶9

The respondent filed counter-affidavit denying the averments in the affidavit of the petitioner. It is the contention of the respondent that his marriage with petitioner was solemnised on 17.11.2021 in a function hall at Sri Kalahasthi, after that petitioner joined him at Kavali town but it was not consummated, due to the attitude of the petitioner. He alleged that the petitioner harassed him and all of a sudden on 31.07.2022 at 11:30 a.m, parents of the petitioner and her relatives trespassed into the house at Kavali and quarrelled with him by using filthy language, beat him and his parents. The respondent submits that the petitioner filed a report with baseless allegations vide Crime No.87 of 2022 on 17.08.2022 for the offences punishable under section 498-A,323 r/w 34 IPC wherein, SHO issued notice of 41-A Cr.P.C on 19.10.2022, later on, charge sheet was filed vide CC No.965 of 2022 before I Additional Junior Civil Judge, Sri Kalahasthi. It is also the contention of the respondent that due to unbearable harassment of the petitioner, he filed H.M.O.P No. 76 of 2022 on the file of Senior Civil Judge Court, Kavali for dissolution of marriage. The respondent submits that the petitioner is not residing at Sri Kalahasthi who is working as software employee in a Company at Bangalore, though she underwent MRI scan on 26.03.2022 at Nellore, now she is alright for the past several years and created ground of ill health to file a

¶10

¶11

BSS, J Tr.C.M.P.No.223 of 2024

¶12

transfer petition. He further submit that the distance is not a criteria to consider the transfer the petition and also relied on the orders passed by this court in transfer civil miscellaneous petition 219 of 2023 dated 03.10.2023. He prays to dismiss the petition.

¶13

The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is suffering from Optic Perineuritis illness who also underwent MRI scanning and now she is taking Homeopathy treatment. He would further submit that though petitioner is a software employee, now residing at parents house at Sri Kalahasthi and respondent also shown her residential address at Sri Kalahasthi in HMOP No.76 of 2022 on the file of Senior Civil Judge Court, Kavali. He argued that respondent not denied the ill health of the petitioner in the counter affidavit but only contended that petitioner has become alright but not filed any record to support his contention. It is also the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that CC No. 965 of 2022 and DVC No.17 of 2022 are pending on the file of Junior Civil Judge Court, Sri Kalahasthi, wherein the respondent has to appear to put forth his defence, due to that it may not be difficult for respondent to attend the Court at Sri Kalahasthi, if the request of the petitioner to transfer H.M.O.P No.76 of 2022 is considered. He prays to allow the petition.

¶14

BSS, J Tr.C.M.P.No.223 of 2024

¶15

¶16

The learned counsel representing the respondent would submit that though petitioner is working as Software Employee at Bangalore, even at the time of marriage and on the date of filing of the transfer petition, stated that she is residing in her parents house at Sri Kalahasthi. He would further submit that petitioner already engaged counsel in HMOP No. 76 of 2022 and also filed counter affidavit in the said petition. He argued that petitioner now not suffering from any ill-health, due to that she is continuing her job at Bangalore but filed case against the respondent pending before Senior Civil Judge Court, Sri Kalahasthi. It is also the contention of the learned counsel for the respondent that the distance alone is not a criteria to consider the transfer application filed by the petitioner to transfer the divorce petition and prays to dismiss the petition.

¶17

Admittedly, the marriage between the petitioner with respondent was solemnized on 17.01.2021 in a function hall at Sri Kalahasthi. It is also not in dispute that the petitioner was suffering from ill-health respondent also specially stated in the counter-affidavit that now petitioner has become alright. The fact remains is that the petitioner suffered from neurological illness to support her contention, she also filed MRI scan report along with this petition. A perusal of copy of FIR in Crime No. 87 of 2022

¶18

BSS, J Tr.C.M.P.No.223 of 2024

¶19

¶20

which was lodged on 17.08.2022 against the respondent and thereafter, the respondent filed H.M.O.P No. 76 of 2022 on 01.09.2022. The respondent has not filed any copy of FIR for the alleged incident that took place on 31.07.2022 at 11:30 a.m. in his house at Kavali. It is also not in dispute that petitioner filed DVC No. 17 of 2022 and CC No.965 of 2022, both are pending on the file of Additional Junior Civil Judge Court, Sri Kalahasthi, wherein the respondent has to appear to put forth his defence.

¶21

When two cases are pending before Additional Junior Civil Judge Court, Sri Kalahasthi, wherein the respondent has to appear, it may not be difficult for him to appear before Senior Civil Judge Court, Sri Kalahasthi, if the request of the petitioner for transfer of the case from Senior Civil Judge Court, Kavali to Senior Civil Judge Court, Sri Kalahasthi is considered. There are grounds to consider the request of the petitioner to transfer the case.

¶22

In the result, the Transfer Miscellaneous Petition is allowed. H.M.O.P No.76 of 2022 on the file of Senior Civil Judge Court, Kavali, Nellore District is hereby withdrawn and transferred to Senior Civil Judge Court, Sri Kalahasthi, Chittoor District. The learned Senior Civil Judge, Kavali, Nellore District, shall transmit

¶23

the case records in H.M.O.P No.76 of 2022 to Senior Civil Judge Court, Sri Kalahasthi, duly indexed, as expeditiously as possible,

¶24

BSS, J Tr.C.M.P.No.223 of 2024

¶25

¶26

within a period of two (2) weeks from the date of receipt of order of this Court in the present petition.

¶27

Both parties shall appear before Senior Civil Judge Court, Sri Kalahasthi, on 13.02.2024 at 10.30 am. No order as to costs.

¶28

The learned Senior Civil Judge, Sri Kalahasthi, shall not insist the physical presence of the respondent/husband for each and every adjournment, if he engages a counsel and he can insist his presence whenever it is required or at the time of recording his evidence before the Court. No order as to costs.

¶29

Consequently, miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand

¶30

closed. The interim stay granted if any, shall stand vacated.

¶31

____________________________________ JUSTICE BANDARU SYAMSUNDER

¶32

Date: 10.01.2024 RSD

¶33

BSS, J Tr.C.M.P.No.223 of 2024

¶34

¶35

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE BANDARU SYAMSUNDER

¶36

TRANSFER CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION

¶37

NO.223 OF 2023

¶38

Date: 10.01.2024 RSD

R Madhu Harshitha Singh v. R Jitendra Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R Madhu Harshitha Singh v. R Jitendra Singh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Palaparthi Bhargaviat Lakshmi Bhargavi Vs Mr.Simhadri Gopal Reddy

Nandigama Radha Krishna Murthy, Guntur Dist and Anr. Vs Ilapavuluri Adiseshaiah, Guntur

Nandigam Koteswara Rao, Guntur Dist Vs Llapavuluri Adiseshaiah, Guntur Dist

Chennupati Sravani Vs Nallagarla Sudarshan Rao

Gurajala (Yetcharla) Gowri Prasanna Vs Gurajala Srinivasa Rao

Samudrala Gurunadham Vs the State of Andhra Pradesh