Allowed

Pagilla Vani @ Pallavi v. Pagilla Purushotham

Telangana HC13 Oct 2025TRCMP/225/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Wife sought transfer of her husband's divorce petition from Devarakonda to Family Court, Ranga Reddy District citing her convenience. Respondent unrepresented; relying on Supreme Court precedent favouring wife's convenience in matrimonial matters, transfer allowed.

What did the court decide?

H.M.O.P. No. 81 of 2024 withdrawn from Senior Civil Judge, Devarakonda and transferred to Family Court, Ranga Reddy District; record within one month; no costs.

Pagilla Vani @ Pallavi Vs Pagilla Purushotham — Matrimonial and Divorce | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

i I II I I I II nl li i; ri i i t. i t IIi II I I I I j itI I I I II II t I I i ! t I ! ! i II i

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA

¶3

AT HYDERABAD

¶4

MONDAY,THE THIRTEENTH DAY OF OCTOBER

¶5

TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE

¶6

PRESENT

¶7

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE RENUKA YARA

¶8

TRANS. CIVIL MISC.PETITION NO: 225 OF 2025

¶9

Between:

¶10

Pagilla vani @ Pallavi, wo. Purushotham, D/o. Domakonda venkatesh, aged 22 years, Presently residing H.No.16-2-7521Kt52, Opp Shiva Ganga Theathre, S.K. Bazar, Dilsukhnagar, Hyderabad, Telangana State

¶11

...PETITIONER/RESPONDENT tN H.M.O.P.

¶12

AND

¶13

Pagilla Purushotham, S/o. Late [\4uthaiah, Aged 29 years, Occ- Agriculture, R/o-H.No. 2-32, Lenkalapallyu Village, t\Iarriguda tt/andal, Nalgonda District.

¶14

...RESPONDENT/PETITIONER IN H.M.O.P.

¶15

Petition Under Section 24 of the C.P.C. Praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith,the High Court may be pleased to withdraw the HI/OP. No.81 of 2024 (filed by the Respondent herein for grant of Decree of Divorce) on the file of the Court of Senior Civil Judge at Devaiakonda , and the transfer the same to the Court of the Family Court at Ranga Reddy District.

¶16

lA NO: 1 OF 2025

¶17

Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings in HMOP. No.81 of 2024 Court of Senior Civil Judge at Devarakonda pending disposal of the above Transfer CMp .

¶18

Counsel for the Petitioner

¶19

:Sll. Dinesh Reddy Mallireddy

¶20

Counsel for the Respondent

¶21

The Court made the following: ORDER

¶22

¶23

THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE RENUKIT YAR/{

¶24

Tr.C.M.P.No.225 of 2o.25

¶25

ORDER

¶26

Heard Sri M.Dinesh Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner. In spite of service of notice on respondent, none \ appeared and there is no representation for the respondent. Perused the entire record.

¶27

t g I I

¶28

This petition is filed by the petitioner seeking transfer of H.M.O.P No.81 of 2024 on the file of learned Senior Civil Judge at Devarakonda to the learned Family Court, Rangareddy District.

¶29

Since there are catena of judgments of the Honble Supreme Court to consider the convenience of^{wife while} transferring matters arising^{out of matrimonial disputes,} keeping in view of^{the convenience of the petitioner herein,} the relief prayed^{for is granted.}

¶30

In the result, the Transfer^{Civil Miscellaneous Petition is} allowed and the H.M.O.P.No.81^{of 2024 pendingon the file of} the learned Senior^{Civil Judge at Devarakonda,is withdrawrl}

RY,J TRCMP-225-2025

! I I I I

and.transferredtothelearnedFamilyCourt,Rangareddy. Theentireoriginalrecordshallbetransmitted'withinaperiod of one^{month'There shall be no order as tocosts'}

¶35

Miscellaneou'sPetitions'ifany'pendinginthispetition'shall

¶36

stand^closed.

¶37

/,TRUE^COPY//

¶38

SD/- B.REKHA^RANI NSSISiANT^REGISTRAR a

SECTION^OFFICER

To,

The^{Senior Civil Judge at Devarakonda'}

¶43

The^{Judge, Family Court at Ranga Reddy District'}

¶44

One^{CC to SRI'Dinesh ReddyMaltireddy Advocate IOPUC]}

¶45

Two^{CD CoPies}

G TUPSL

HIGH COURT

DATED: 13t1O12O2S

ORDER

rif' $ l'rr. s
x
22EtM
*
-k
[1,,1'I'

¶53

TRCMP.No.22S of 2025

¶54

ALLOWING THE TRANSFER C.M.P.

¶55

Pagilla Vani @ Pallavi v. Pagilla Purushotham

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pagilla Vani @ Pallavi v. Pagilla Purushotham

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

Kyama Venkateshwarlu Vs Smt. a.Sushma

J Suchitha Vs Papanwar Rajkumar Raju

Mrs. Shashi Kwatra Vs Arvind Vihar Apartment Flat Owners Welfare Society

Samala Venkataiah @ Venkatesh Vs B. Yadagiri @ Yadaiah (Died) per LRs

Paruvugari Tejaswini @ Vangala Karthika Vs Paruvugari Raj Kumar

Sri E. Bhanu Prakash Vs M/s. Anjali Constructions