Alla Yagnika Vs Alla Vinya Kumar

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V. GOPALA KRISHNA RAO TRANSFER CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.327 of 2025

ORDER:

The petitioner/wife herein filed the present petition under Section 24

of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short, „the C.P.C.‟), seeking withdrawal of H.M.O.P.No.90 of 2024, on the file of the IV Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Guntur, Guntur District, and to transfer the same to the Court of the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Avanigadda, Krishna District, for trial and disposal.

¶5

The case of the petitioner in brief is as follows:

¶6

i. The petitioner is the legally wedded wife of the respondent/husband, and their marriage was solemnized on 19.06.2021 at Nacharamma Temple, Pedaprolu, Mopidevi Mandal, as per Hindu rites and caste customs. Thereafter, due to matrimonial disputes between the parties, the petitioner/wife has been residing separately in her parents‟ house at Nagayathippa Village, Mopidevi Mandal, Krishna District. The petitioner/wife further pleaded that, in view of the harassment caused by the respondent/husband, she lodged a complaint dated 07.06.2025 against the respondent/husband herein, which was registered as F.I.R.No.182 of 2025, for the offences punishable under Section 85 r/w 3(5) BNS and Sections 3 & 4 of

¶7

Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, before the Challapalli Police Station, the same is pending for investigation.

¶8

2

¶9

ii. The petitioner/wife further pleaded that, with a view to cause inconvenience to her, the respondent/husband filed a divorce petition vide H.M.O.P.No.90 of 2024, on the file of the learned IV Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Guntur, Guntur District, under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, for dissolution of marriage, and the same is also pending for adjudication.

¶10

Learned counsel for the petitioner would further contend that the petitioner, being a woman, has been residing at her parents‟ house and depending upon the mercy of her parents at Nagayathippa Village, Mopidevi Mandal, Krishna District and it is very difficult for her to travel to attend the case proceedings filed by the respondent/husband before the Court at Guntur without any male assistance, and that she was constrained to file the present petition against the respondent/husband, seeking withdrawal of H.M.O.P.No.90 of 2024, on the file of the IV Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Guntur, Guntur District, and transfer the same to the file of the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Avanigadda, Krishna District, for trial and disposal of the same.

¶11

Learned counsel for the respondent would contend that the respondent herein is working as a Software Engineer at Hyderabad and that there are no merits in the transfer petition filed by the petitioner, and the petition may be dismissed. He would further contend that in case, if this

¶12

3

¶13

Court is inclined to transfer the said H.M.O.P.No.90 of 2024 to Avanigadda, it would be very difficult for the respondent/husband herein to appear before the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Avanigadda, Krishna District.

¶14

Heard learned counsel appearing on both sides.

¶15

Perused the material available on record.

¶16

The material on record prima facie goes to show that, due to the matrimonial disputes between both parties, the petitioner/wife has been residing with her parents in Nagayathippa Village. The material on record further reveals that the respondent/husband has instituted a petition against the petitioner/wife herein vide H.M.O.P.No.90 of 2024, on the file of the IV Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Guntur, Guntur District, seeking dissolution of marriage, and the same is also pending for adjudication.

¶17

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.”

¶18

The Apex Court in a case of N.C.V. Aishwarya Vs A.S.Saravana Karthik Sha² held as follows:

¶19

“ 9. The cardinal principle for exercise of power under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure is that the ends of justice should

¶20

1 (2000) 10 SCC 304

¶21

2 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 627

¶22

4

¶23

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.”

¶24

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 laws and on considering the facts and circumstances of the present case that in matrimonial proceedings, the convenience of the wife has to be taken into consideration than that of the inconvenience of the husband. Therefore, I am of the considered view that there are justifiable grounds to consider the request made by the petitioner/wife, seeking transfer of H.M.O.P.No.90 of 2024, on the file of the IV Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Guntur, Guntur District, to the file of the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Avanigadda, Krishna District. Further, on considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respondent that the respondent/husband herein is a Software Engineer who is currently working at Hyderabad, therefore, it is desirable to dispense with the personal appearance of the respondent/husband herein i.e., the petitioner

¶25

5

¶26

in H.M.O.P.No.90 of 2024, on the file of the IV Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Guntur, Guntur District, before the transferee Court, except on the days when his personal appearance is required before the said Court as per law.

¶27

In the result, the Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is allowed and the H.M.O.P.No.90 of 2024, on the file of the IV Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Guntur, Guntur District, is hereby withdrawn and transferred to the file of the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Avanigadda, Krishna District. The learned IV Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Guntur, Guntur District, shall transmit the case record in H.M.O.P.No.90 of 2024, to the file of the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Avanigadda, Krishna District, duly indexed as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of one (01) week from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. Both the parties are directed to appear before the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Avanigadda, Krishna District on 23.02.2026 at 10.30 A.M. The transferee Court i.e., learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Avanigadda, Krishna District, is hereby directed not to insist for the personal appearance of the respondent herein i.e., the petitioner in H.M.O.P.No.90 of 2024, as long as his counsel is attending the Court proceedings and representing the case except on the day when re-conciliation proceedings are being taken up or on the day when his cross-examination is required to be recorded or on any other day

¶28

6

¶29

when his personal appearance is required as directed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Avanigadda, Krishna District.

¶30

As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending and the Interim order granted earlier, if any, shall stand closed.

¶31

_______________________________ JUSTICE V. GOPALA KRISHNA RAO

¶32

Date: 20.01.2026 CC by tomorrow B/o. MH

¶33

7