Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Bobbili Doni Divya vs Bobbili Shyam Sagar on 15 November, 2024
APHC010236852024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
AT AMARAVATI [3397]
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
FRIDAY ,THE FIFTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER
TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FOUR
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENUTHURUMALLI GOPALA
KRISHNA RAO
TRANS. CIVIL MISC.PETITION NO: 194/2024
Between:
Bobbili (doni) Divya ...PETITIONER
AND
Bobbili Shyam Sagar ...RESPONDENT
Counsel for the Petitioner:
1. G RAMA GOPAL
Counsel for the Respondent:
1. A JAYANTHI
The Court made the following:
ORDER:
The petitioner/wife filed the present petition under Section 24 of the
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, seeking to withdraw F.C.O.P.No.620 of 2024
on the file of the Family Court, Visakhapatnam and transfer the same to the
Family Court, Kakinada.
2. The case of the petitioner in brief is as follows:
I. The petitioner is the legally wedded wife of the respondent and
their marriage has been performed on 08.12.2022. In view of the
matrimonial disputes between both the parties, the petitioner/wife
is staying at her parents' house at Santhoshnagar, Kakinada
District. The petitioner pleaded that she had lodged a complaint in
F.I.R.No.268 of 2024 before the Station House Officer,
Sarpavaram Police Station against the respondent and the same
is pending for investigation. The petitioner pleaded that she had
filed a Maintenance Case vide M.C.No.51 of 2024, on the file of
the VI Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kakinada,
against the respondent and his family members and the same is
pending for adjudication. The petitioner contend that to cause
inconvenience to her, the respondent/husband has filed
F.C.O.P.No.620 of 2024 on the file of the Family Court,
Visakhapatnam under Section 12(1)(a) of the Hindu Marriage Act,
1955 seeking for annulment of marriage.
II. Learned counsel for the petitioner further contended that the
petitioner being a woman, depending upon her parents, it is very
difficult for her to travel at a distance more than 200Kms from
Kakinada to Visakhapatnam without any male support and that
she was constrained to file the present petition against the
respondent/husband seeking to withdraw F.C.O.P.No.620 of
2024 on the file of the Family Court, Visakhapatnam and transfer
the same to the Family Court, Kakinada.
3. Heard Smt. V.Uma Devi, learned counsel representing Sri G.Rama
Gopal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt. A.Jayanthi, learned counsel
for the respondent. Perused the material available on record.
4. The respondent had filed a counter affidavit and the learned counsel for
the respondent has placed reliance on the Judgment of the Hon'ble Apex
Court in Rajkumar Sabu Vs. Sabu Trade Private Ltd.1, but the facts of the
present Transfer Petition are different.
5. Learned counsel for the respondent herein has represented that the
respondent is staying at USA and his father is attending the Court
proceedings in F.C.O.P.No.620 of 2024 on the file of the Family Court,
Visakhapatnam as a GPA holder and requested to dispense with the presence
of the respondent herein before the transferee Court. Learned counsel
appearing for both sides has fairly requested to fix a time limit to the
transferee Court for disposal of the case according to law.
6. The Apex Court in a case of GEETA HEERA Vs HARISH CHANDER
HEERA 2, held by considering the fact that "if a wife does not have sufficient
funds to visit the place where the divorce petition is filed by her husband, then
the transfer petition filed by the wife may be allowed."
2021 SCC Online SC 378
(2000) 10 SCC 304
7. The Apex Court in a case of N.C.V. Aishwarya Vs A.S.Saravana
Karthik Sha3 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."
8. On considering the submissions made by the learned counsel
appearing for both sides and in view of the ratio laid down in the aforesaid
case laws that in matrimonial proceedings, the convenience of the wife has to
be considered than that of the inconvenience of the husband. Therefore, this
Court is of the considered view that there are grounds to consider the request
of the petitioner/wife to withdraw F.C.O.P.No.620 of 2024 on the file of the
Family Court, Visakhapatnam and transfer the same to the Court of Principal
Senior Civil Judge, Kakinada. Further, the personal attendance of the
respondent herein i.e. the petitioner in F.C.O.P.No.620 of 2024 on the file of
the Family Court, Visakhapatnam, has been dispensed with before the
transferee Court i.e., the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Kakinada, except on the
days when his presence is required as per law.
2022 LiveLaw (SC) 627
9. In the result, the present petition is allowed and F.C.O.P.No.620 of 2024
on the file of the Family Court, Visakhapatnam, is hereby withdrawn and
transferred to the Court of Principal Senior Civil Judge, Kakinada. The Family
Court, Visakhapatnam, shall transmit the case record in F.C.O.P.No.620 of
2024 to the Principal Senior Civil Judge Court, Kakinada, duly indexed as
expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of two (02) weeks from the
date of receipt of a copy of the order. Further, the personal attendance of the
respondent herein i.e. the petitioner in F.C.O.P.No.620 of 2024 on the file of
the Family Court, Visakhapatnam, has been dispensed with before the
transferee Court i.e., the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Kakinada, except on the
days when his presence is required as per law and the transferee Court i.e.,
the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Kakinada is hereby directed to dispose of the
case in F.C.O.P.No.620 of 2024 on merits within a period of six (06) months
from the date of receipt of the record from the Family Court, Visakhapatnam.
Both the parties are directed to appear before the Principal Senior Civil Judge
Court, Kakinada on 11.12.2024, at 10.30 a.m. There shall be no order as to
costs.
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending and the Interim
order granted earlier, if any, shall stand closed.
_______________________________
JUSTICE V.GOPALA KRISHNA RAO
Date: 15.11.2024
Note:
Issue C.C. by 18.11.2024.
B/o
SRT
