Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Mallu Sushmitha vs Mallu Ravi Kumar Reddy on 28 January, 2022
HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE M. GANGA RAO
Tr.C.M.P. No.133 of 2021
ORDER:
The petitioner who is the legally wedded wife of the Respondent
filed this petition under the provisions of Section 24 C.P.C. seeking
transfer of F.C.O.P.No.120 of 2020 on the file of the Court of the
Family Court Judge, SPSR Nellore District to Family Court, Kadapa,
Y.S.R.District.
2. The petitioner's marriage was solemnized with the respondent
on 18.11.2018 and started living with the respondent. Due to
disputes, she filed a criminal complaint in FIR No.3 of 2020 on the file
of the Kadapa Women Police Station, Kadapa, Y.S.R. District for the
offences punishable under Section 498A of IPC and Sections 3 and 4
of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1986. On filing Charge Sheet, the crime
was numbered as C.C.No.590 of 2020 on the file of the Court of the
special Judicial Magistrate of First Class for Prohibition and Excise,
Kadapa, Y.S.R.District and the same is pending for adjudication. She
has also filed D.V.C.No.24 of 2020 against the respondent. Now, the
respondent filed F.C.O.P.No.120 of 2020 before the Judge, Family
Court, Nellore seeking dissolution of marriage and the same is
pending adjudication. The petitioner further states that her Mother-
in-Law filed a complaint in FIR No.134 of 2020 on the file of the
Marripadu Police Station, SPSR Nellore District for the offences
punishable under Sections 420, 323, 506, 509 r/w 34 IPC stating
that the father and mother of the petitioner suppressed the fact that
she was deaf and mentally handicapped women and got married to
his son and when the same was questioned by her Mother-in-Law
when she was alone at home, the parents and her brother bet her and
2 MGR, J
Tr.CMP.No.133 of 2021
threatened her to kill. Basing on the same, the police filed Charge
Sheet and the same is numbered as C.C.No.379 of 2020 on the file of
the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Udayagiri.
3. The petitioner states that she is solely dependent on the income
of the parents and residing along with her parents in Kadapa,
whereas the respondent is attending the case in C.C.No.590 of 2020
before the Special Judicial Magistrate of First Class for Prohibition
and Excise, Kadapa, Y.S.R.District. The respondent filed
F.C.O.P.No.120 of 2020 on the file of the Court of the Family Court
Judge, SPSR Nellore District, only with the sole intention to cause
hardship and to force the petitioner to get the disputes compromised.
The distance between Kadapa and Nellore is 239 KMs and requires
five to six hours journey and she has to shift two buses to reach
Kadapa and to attend the court at Kadapa, she needs assistance of
her parents and they have to accompany her. It is expensive to
attend the court at Nellore and she was also not paid any
maintenance and she is solely dependent on the income of the
parents. She did not have any other source of income as she is a
house wife.
4. The Respondent filed counter stating the marriage of the
respondent took place with the petitioner on 11.10.2018 at Jeti Sesha
Reddy Kalyana Mandapam, Nellore. The petitioner lived with the
respondent only for one month. She left to her parents house and
residing with her parents. He came to know that she is suffering with
some disability with regard to hearing and improper functioning of left
hand and left leg. She filed a false case against him. This petition is
3 MGR, J
Tr.CMP.No.133 of 2021
filed with falsehood. If he attends the court at Kadapa, there is life
threat to him.
5. Learned counsel for the respondent relied upon the judgment of
the Apex Court in Krishna Veni Nagam Vs. Harish Nagam1,
wherein it is held that whenever there is life threat, the Doctrine of
forum non conveniens is to be made applicable in matrimonial
proceedings and held that inherent jurisdiction not only to stay
proceedings at inconvenient forum but to transfer proceedings to
alternative forum which is more convenient for both the parties and
which serves ends of justice. But, the learned counsel for the
respondent failed to suggest the convenient court. There is no
alternative court between Kadapa and Nellore or there is no
competent alternative Court to decide the issue. At the most the
matter can be heard at Tirupati but it is expensive and invonveient for
the petitioner. Having considered the inconvenience of the petitioner
and it appears that she is also not doing well and she needs company
of another person to attend the Court. But the threat perception to
the respondent is not supported by any evidence and it is unfounded.
6. Having considered the facts and circumstances, submissions of
the learned counsel and perused the record, this Court found that it
is inconvenient to the petitioner to undertake travel from Kadapa to
Nellore covering a distance of 239 KMs to attend the Court at Nellore.
FCOP.No.120 of 2020 is filed by the husband seeking divorce against
the petitioner. The petitioner being a woman certainly requires
parents' assistance to attend the Court at Nellore. The respondent is
already attending the Court at Kadapa in C.C.No.590 of 2020 on the
(2017) 4 SCC 150
4 MGR, J
Tr.CMP.No.133 of 2021
file of the Court of the Special Judicial Magistrate of First Class for
Prohibition and Excise, Kadapa, Y.S.R.District and also case in
D.V.C.No.24 of 2020, by transfer of the FCOP petition from Family
Court, SPSR Nellore District to the Family Court, Kadapa,
Y.S.R.District, no inconvenience or prejudice would be caused to
Respondent-husband. The petitioner's counsel would contend that in
matrimonial cases, the wife's convenience shall be looked into first.
In support of his contention, he placed reliance on the decisions of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Archana Singh Vs. Surendera
Bahadur Singh2, Sumita Singh Vs. Kumar Sanjay and another3,
Anamika Khanna Vs. Annamneedi Raja Sekhar4, wherein it is held
that in matrimonial matters, when the petitions are filed by the
husband, generally in the event of transfer of cases, the wife's
inconvenience weighs more than that of the husband's inconvenience.
No inconvenience and difficulty could be caused to the respondent in
attending the Court at Kadapa. This Court satisfied that the petition
is justified. Accordingly, the Transfer petition is allowed and FCOP
No.120 of 2020 pending on the file of the Judge, Family Court, Nellore
is withdrawn and transferred to Judge, Family Court, Kadapa and the
transferor Court is directed to send record to the transferee court to
dispose of the same. No order as to costs.
As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending
shall stand closed.
________________
M. GANGA RAO, J
Date: .01.2022
CSR
(2005) 12 SCC 395
(2001 ) 10 SCC 41
2010 (2) ALT 669
5 MGR, J
Tr.CMP.No.133 of 2021
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M. GANGA RAO, J
Tr.CMP.No.133 OF 2021
DT: .01.2O22
CSR
