Allowed

Mukku Tulasi Durga, W/o.Kanaka Durga Prasad v. Mukku Kanaka Durga Prasad

Telangana HC26 Apr 2012TRCMP/437/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is an order allowing the transfer of a guardianship maintenance petition (GWOP No.452 of 2010) from the District Judge, Krishna at Machilipatnam to the Family Court, Hyderabad, citing the petitioner's residence and convenience of the minor child. The respondent's appearance on all dates is exempted except for examination or specific judicial orders.

What did the court decide?

Transfer of GWOP No.452 of 2010 from D.J. Krishna, Machilipatnam to Family Court, Hyderabad. Respondent exempted from appearing on routine dates.

Mukku Tulasi Durga, W/o.Kanaka Durga Prasad… — Child Custody and Guardianship | Telangana HC (2012)

¶1

THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO Tr.C.M.P.No.437 OF 2011

¶2

ORDER:

¶3

This petition is filed by the petitioner-wife under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure seeking to transfer GWOP No.452 of 2010, on the file of the District Judge, Krishna at Machilipatnam to the Family Court, City Civil Courts’ Complex, Hyderabad.

¶4

According to the petitioner, the respondent-husband filed GWOP No.452 of 2010, on the file of the District Judge, Krishna at Machilipatnam, seeking custody of their minor son and that the respondent is already appearing in M.C.No.163 of 2010 on the file of the Additional Sessions Court, Special Court for Jubilee Hills Bomb Blast Cases-cum-Family Court, Criminal Courts Complex, Hyderabad and also in HMOP No.211 of 2009, which was transferred by this Court to the Family Court, City Civil Courts Complex, Hyderabad. Therefore, she is seeking transfer of GWOP No.452 of 2010 on the file of the District Judge, Krishna at Machilipatnam to the Family Court, City Civil Courts’ Complex, Hyderabad.

¶5

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record.

¶6

In spite of service of notice, the respondent herein does not appear before this Court for raising objection to transfer. Therefore, it is presumed that the respondent is not having any serious objection for transfer of the case as sought for by the petitioner.

¶7

Admittedly, the petitioner is residing at Hyderabad along with her parents and minor child. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the proceedings and convenience of the parties, GWOP No.452 of 2010 is withdrawn from the file of the District Judge, Krishna at Machilipatnam and transferred to the Family Court, City Civil Courts’ Complex, Hyderabad. However, the trial Court is directed to dispense with the appearance of the

¶8

respondent on all the dates of posting, except on the dates of his examination as a witness in the O.P and the dates on which the learned Judge insists for his appearance.

¶9

With the above direction, the Transfer CMP is allowed. Consequently, the miscellaneous petitions filed in this revision, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶10

_________________________ JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO

¶11

Dated: 26.04.2012 Va

Mukku Tulasi Durga, W/o.Kanaka Durga Prasad v. Mukku Kanaka Durga Prasad

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mukku Tulasi Durga, W/o.Kanaka Durga Prasad v. Mukku Kanaka Durga Prasad

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

Mr.Srinivasa Venkata Sai Vs Smt. Varahala Sobha Rani

Smt K.Jayashree Vs P.Sri Sai Ram

Mr. Srinivasa Venkata Sai, Vs S.Venkataiah

Adduri Mahesh Reddy, Vs The Sub-Registrar

The Icici Lombard General Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs Bejadi Rani

Meddi Kanthamma, Vs Janga Susheela