Telangana High Court
Smt. Smt. Achanta Alias Koduru Harsha ... vs Mr. Achanta Pranay Krishna on 19 March, 2024
HON'BLE JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY
Tr.C.M.P.No.16 of 2024
ORDER:
This Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed by the petitioner-wife seeking transfer of HMOP.No.47 of 2023 from the file of the Court of Principal Senior Civil Judge, Mulugu to the Court of Principal Senior Civil Judge, Kothagudem.
2. In the affidavit, filed in support of this Tr.C.M.P., it is averred that the marriage of the petitioner-wife was solemnized with the respondent-husband on 19.04.2019. While so, the petitioner unable to bear the physical and mental harassment meted to her by the respondent, her in-laws and their relatives, filed a case against them which is pending on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Manuguru, vide D.V.C.No.94 of 2024. The respondent-husband filed HMOP.No.47 of 2023 on the file of the Principal Senior Judge, Mulugu, seeking a decree of restitution of conjugal rights.
2.1. It is averred that the respondent and his parents harassed her demanding additional dowry, abused her in vulgar language and necked her out of the house and hence, at present she is 2 LNA, J TrCMP.No.16 of 2024 residing along with her parents at Manuguru. It is further stated that her mother is a patient and she has to take care of her. Further, she apprehends threat in the hands of her in-laws if she travels all alone from Manuguru to Mulugu to attend the Court proceedings in the aforesaid HMOP. Therefore, she prays this Court to transfer the aforesaid HMOP to the Court of Principal Senior Civil Judge, Kothagudem.
3. The respondent filed counter-affidavit inter alia denying the averments made in the affidavit as regards the allegation of harassment against him and his family members. It is further stated that in fact, it is the petitioner who left the company of the respondent without any intimation along with her belongings including gold ornaments. He further stated that the apprehension of the petitioner that there is threat to her life is false and concocted only for the purpose of filing this Transfer Petition. Hence, he prays to dismiss the petition.
4. Heard Smt R.Deepa, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Bommagani Prabhakar, the learned counsel for the respondent. Perused the material available on record.
3 LNA, J TrCMP.No.16 of 2024
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that due to matrimonial disputes, the petitioner is residing with her parents at Manuguru. He further submitted that it is difficult for the petitioner to travel all alone from Manuguru to Mulugu to attend the Court proceedings in the HMOP and the petitioner also apprehends threat in the hands of her in-laws when she attends the Court at Mulugu. Therefore, she prayed to transfer the HMOP filed by the respondent to the Court of Principal Senior Civil Judge, Kothagudem.
5.1. Learned counsel for the petitioner further contended that in transfer proceedings arising out of matrimonial disputes under Section 24 of C.P.C., the convenience of the wife has to be considered vis-à-vis the convenience of the husband, and therefore, the request of the petitioner-wife needs to be considered. In support of the said contentions, the learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in NCV Aishwarya Vs A.S.Saravana Karthik Sha 1.
1 2022 SCC Online SC 1199 4 LNA, J TrCMP.No.16 of 2024
6. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent would submit that the petitioner herself left the company of the respondent and in spite of advice of the elders and the family members, she did not join his conjugal society. The petitioner did not choose to give any reply to the notice issued to her by the respondent calling upon her to join his society. Therefore, the respondent filed HMOP on the file of the Court of Principal Senior Civil Judge, Kothagudem, praying for a decree of restitution of conjugal rights. Learned counsel contended that the petitioner is making adverse allegations against him and his family members without any proof. By submitting thus, the learned counsel for the respondent prays to dismiss the petition.
7. In order to decide this Tr.C.M.P., it is not necessary to delve into the merits of the case and the allegations made by the parties against each other.
8. Admittedly, the petitioner is residing with her parents at Manuguru, which is at a distance of 120 kms from Mulugu. The petitioner's case is that she apprehends threat to her life at the 5 LNA, J TrCMP.No.16 of 2024 hands of her in-laws if she attends the Court at Mulugu. That apart, the petitioner stated that she has to look after her ailing mother at Manuguru and as such, it is difficult for her to travel all alone from Manuguru to Mulugu to attend the proceedings in the HMOP at Mulugu. On the said grounds, the petitioner seeks transfer of the HMOP from the Court of Principal Senior Civil Judge, Mulugu to the Court of Principal Senior Civil Judge, Kothagudem.
9. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in NCV Aishwarya's case (1st cited supra) held as follows:
"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."
6 LNA, J TrCMP.No.16 of 2024
10. The principle of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in N.C.V.Aishwarya's case (1st cited supra), has been reiterated by the High Court of Bombay in Devika Dhiraj Patil Nee Devika Jayprakash Buttepatil v. Dhiraj Sunil Patil 2, and observed as under:-
"In a country like India, important decisions such as marriage, divorce are still taken with the guidance and blessings of elders in the family. For a lady to travel alone for the proceedings to a Court where the fate of her marriage is going to be decided without any family member would definitely be a matter of concern and cause not only physical inconvenience but also emotional and psychological inconvenience
11. Further, the High Court of Bombay in Priyanka Rahul Patil v. Rahul Ravindra Patil 3 followed the principle laid down in N.C.V.Aishwarya's case (1st cited supra) and Devika Dhiraj Patil Nee Devika Jayprakash Buttepatil's case (2nd cited supra), and held as follows:-
"The underlying principle governing the proceedings under Section 24 of the CPC, is that convenience of the wife is to be preferred over the convenience of the husband."2
(2023 SCC OnLine Bom 1926) 3 (2023 SCC OnLine Bom 1982) 7 LNA, J TrCMP.No.16 of 2024
12. Thus, there are catena of decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and other High Courts to the effect that in matrimonial matters/disputes, while considering the application for transfer of the case from one Court to another Court, the Courts must prefer the convenience of the wife as against the convenience of the husband.
13. In the present, case, a perusal of the record discloses that the petitioner-wife is seeking transfer of the H.M.O.P. filed by the respondent-husband from the Court of Principal Senior Civil Judge, Mulugu to the Court of Principal Senior Civil Judge, Kothagudem, on the ground that she is apprehending threat to her life if she goes to Mulugu to attend Court proceedings in HMOP.
14. Therefore, in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the light of the principle laid down in the aforesaid decisions, this Court is inclined to accede to the request of the petitioner-wife seeking transfer of the case.
15. Accordingly, this Transfer C.M.P. is allowed and HMOP.No.47 of 2023 pending on the file of the Court of Principal 8 LNA, J TrCMP.No.16 of 2024 Senior Civil Judge, Mulugu, is withdrawn and transferred to the Court of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Kothagudem, for disposal in accordance with law.
16. The Principal Senior Civil Judge, Mulugu shall transmit the entire original record in HMOP.No.47 of 2023, duly indexed, to the Court of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Kothagudem, preferably within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Interim order granted by this Court on 09.02.2024 is vacated.
17. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
__________________________________
LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY, J
Date: 19 .03.2024
dr