Telangana High Court
Smt. Hemalatha Vempa Hemalatha Akunuri vs Vempa Sai Akshay on 23 February, 2024
`HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY
Tr.C.M.P.No.9 of 2024
ORDER:
This Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed seeking
transfer of F.C.O.P.No.1404 of 2022 from the file of the Judge,
Family Court, Medchal-Malkajgiri District at Malkajgiri, filed by
the respondent-husband, to the Court of the Judge, Family Court,
Ranga Reddy District at Kukatpally.
2. The brief facts leading to filing of the present Tr.C.M.P. are
that the marriage of the petitioner-wife was solemnized with the
respondent-husband on 20.02.2022 at Sundaraiah Kalyana
Mandapam, Pragathi Nagar Cheruvu, Ranga Reddy District, as
per the prevailing customs in their community.
3. In view of the harassment and differences, the petitioner
filed D.V.C.No.9 of 2023 and C.C.No.9608 of 2022. The
respondent filed FCOP No.1404 of 2022 on the file of the Judge,
Family Court, Medchal-Malkajgiri District at Malkajgiri, for
divorce.
4. It is stated that the petitioner cannot travel alone from
Kukatpally to the Court at Malkajgiri and there is a threat to her
life. It is further stated that for every hearing, the petitioner has
2 LNA, J
to take assistance from her family members, which is very
difficult. Further, the case filed by the petitioner i.e., D.V.C.No.9
of 2023 and C.C.No.9608 of 2022 are pending before the Courts at
Kukatpally. Hence, the petitioner prayed to transfer
F.C.O.P.No.1404 of 2022, which is filed by the respondent, from
the Court, at Malkajgiri to the Court at Kukatpally.
5. Heard Sri G. Vaasudeevudu, the learned counsel for the
petitioner and Sri Banavath Nageshwar Rao, the learned counsel
for the respondent. Perused the record.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the
respondent harassed the petitioner in many ways and the parents
of the respondent were encouraging him and they were also
harassing the petitioner and were also manhandling the
petitioner on some occasions and were demanding to get a share
out of the petitioner father's properties. Under these
circumstances, the petitioner filed D.V.C.No.9 of 2023 and also
filed a case in C.C.No.9608 of 2022 which are pending in the
Courts at Kukatpally. Therefore, he prayed to transfer the
F.C.O.P. filed by the respondent to the Family Court at
Kukatpally. He further contended that in the transfer proceedings
3 LNA, J
of matrimonial disputes, 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 Gargi Konar v. Jagjeet Singh 1.
7. In Gargi Konar's case (1st cited supra), which was relied
upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the Hon'ble
Supreme Court held as under:
"The only ground made out in the transfer petition by the petitioner
wife is that she is a helpless woman fully dependent upon her father
and that her financial capacity is not such so that she can contest the
proceedings in Bhatinda in the State of Punjab.
In our view, this is not a ground for transfer at all. The
respondent can be directed to pay for her and her companions,
to-and-fro and stay, expenses on every occasion on which she is
required to travel. The Additional Civil Judge before whom the case
is pending is directed to quantify the amount and to ensure that the
same is paid to her on every occasion that she is required to remain
present in the court. With these directions, the transfer petition
stands dismissed."
(2005) 11 Supreme Court Cases 447
4 LNA, J
8. The facts of the said case and the facts of the present case
are different and thus, the above judgment has no application to
the present case.
9. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in NCV Aishwarya Vs
A.S.Saravana Karthik Sha 2 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."
"10. It is pertinent to take note that one more G.W.O.P.No.38 of
2020 filed by the petitioner for same relief is pending before the
learned I Additional Judge Family Court, City Civil Court,
Hyderabad. Therefore, it is desirable that both the matters are tried
and decided by the same Courts to avoid conflict of decisions and it is
also convenient for both the parties."
2022 SCC Online SC 1199
5 LNA, J
10. 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 3, 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 4 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."
(2023 SCC OnLine Bom 1926)
(2023 SCC OnLine Bom 1982)
6 LNA, J
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 proceedings from one Court to another Court,
the Courts must prefer the convenience of the wife over the
convenience of the husband.
13. In the present, case, a perusal of the record discloses that
the petitioner is seeking transfer of the F.C.O.P. filed by the
respondent from the Family Court, Malkajgiri District at
Malkajgiri, to the Family Court, Kukatpally, on the ground that
whenever she has to attend before the Court of Malkajgiri District
at Malkajgiri, she has no security and therefore, it is difficult for
her to travel from Kukatpally to Malkajgiri District at Malkajgiri
on every date of adjournment. Further, for every hearing, she has
to take assistance from her family members.
14. Also, it is relevant to note that the cases viz., Domestic
Violence Case and Criminal Case between the parties are pending
before the Courts at Kukatpally, whereas FCOP filed by the
respondent-husband is pending before the Court, Malkajgiri
District at Malkajgiri
7 LNA, J
15. Therefore, in the facts and circumstances of the case and in
the light of the principles laid down in the aforesaid decisions,
this Court is inclined to accede to the request of the petitioner-
wife seeking transfer of the case.
16. Accordingly, this Transfer C.M.P. is allowed and
F.C.O.P.No.1404 of 2022 pending on the file of Judge, Family
Court, Malkajgiri District at Malkajgiri, is withdrawn and
transferred to the file of the Judge, Family Court, Kukatpally, for
disposal in accordance with law.
17. The learned Judge, Family Court, Malkajgiri District at
Malkajgiri, shall transmit the entire original record in
F.C.O.P.No.1404 of 2022 duly indexed, to the Court of the Judge,
Family Court, Kukatpally, preferably within a period of one
month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
18. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand
closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
__________________________________
LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY, J
Date: 23.02.2024
ssm
