Telangana High Court
Mrs. K. Tejaswini Samyuktha vs Mr. D. Shiva Krishna on 12 June, 2025
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY
Tr.C.M.P.No.485 of 2024
ORDER:
This Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed by the petitioner-wife seeking transfer of F.C.O.P.No.291 of 2024 from the file of the Additional Family Court, Medchal Malkajgiri District at Kukatpally, filed by the respondent-husband, to the Court of the Senior Civil Judge Court, Miryalaguda.
2. Heard Sri P. Ravindra Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner and G. Ramya Kumari, learned counsel for the respondent.
3. The brief facts leading to filing of the present Tr.C.M.P. are that the marriage of the petitioner and respondent was solemnized on 23.06.2019 at S.P.Convention, Venkateshwara Temple Road, Housing Board Colony, Miryalaguda, Nalgonda District, as per the prevailing customs in Hindu Religion. After marriage, petitioner joined conjugal life with the respondent and out of their wedlock, they were blessed with two children and one of them is specially disabled child. After the marriage, respondent started harassing the petitioner mentally and 2 physically and unable to bear the harassment of the respondent, petitioner left the company of the respondent in the month of March, 2024 and started living with their parents at Miryalguda.
4. Later, Respondent filed F.C.O.P.No.291 of 2024, under Section 13(1) (IA) of Hindu Marriage Act, before Additional Family Court, Medchal Malkajgiri District at Kukatpally, for Dissolution of Marraige.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that petitioner is dependent on their parents and has no independent income and apart from that she has to take care of two minor children out of which one child is specially child and in such a situation, it is very difficult for her to travel 180 kms from Miryalaguda to Kukatpally. Therefore, prayed to allow the petition.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner further contended that F.C.O.P. filed by the respondent is coming for counter in trial Court and no prejudice will be caused to the respondent if the matter is transferred from Kukatpally Court to Miryalaguda Court.
3
7. Leaned counsel for the respondent contended that respondent is willing to pay transport and other expenses to the petitioner, for her personal appearance before the Kukatpally Court and further contended that the father of the petitioner is a Senior Counsel in Miryalaguda and he may influence the Court proceedings. Hence prayed to dismiss the petition.
8. The learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon the Hon'ble Supreme Court in NCV Aishwarya Vs. A.S.Saravana Karthik Sha 1 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."
1 2022 SCC Online SC 1199 4
9. The principle of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in N.C.V.Aishwarya's case (2nd 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
10. 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 (2nd cited supra) and Devika Dhiraj Patil Nee Devika Jayprakash Buttepatil's case (3rd cited supra), and held as follows:-
"The underlying principle governing the proceedings under Section 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) 5
11. 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 proceedings from one Court to another Court, the Courts must prefer the convenience of the wife over the convenience of the husband.
12. A perusal of the record would disclose that petitioner has two minor children and one of them is specially disabled child and moreover she is dependent on her parents as she has no source of income and it is difficult for her to travel 180 kms from Miryalaguda to Kukatpally, along with two minor children on each and every date of hearing of F.C.O.P.No.291 of 2024.
13. Therefore, in view of the underlying principle enunciated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and various other High Courts in the aforesaid judgments that the convenience of the petitioner/wife has to be given priority/preference over the convenience of the respondent/husband, this Transfer CMP deserves to be allowed.
6
14. Accordingly, this Transfer C.M.P. is allowed and F.C.O.P.No.291 of 2024, pending before the Additional Family Court, Medchal Malkajgiri District at Kukatpally, is withdrawn and transferred to the Senior Civil Judge, Miryalaguda for disposal in accordance with law.
15. The learned Additional Family Court, Medchal Malkajgiri District at Kukatpally, shall transmit the entire original record in F.C.O.P.No.291 of 2024 duly indexed, to the Court of the Senior Civil Judge, Miryalaguda, preferably within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
__________________________________ LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY, J Date: 12.06.2025 tssb