Telangana High Court
Mrs. Yalijala Sandhya vs Mr. Yalijala Sai Kumar on 25 February, 2025
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY
Tr.C.M.P.No.442 of 2024
ORDER:
This Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed seeking
transfer of H.M.O.P.No.58 of 2024 from the file of the Judge,
Family Court at, Nalgonda filed by the respondent-husband, to
the Court of the Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar.
2. Heard Sri. P. Venkata Subba Rao, learned counsel for the
petitioner and Sri. R. Nagarjuna Reddy, 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-wife was solemnized with the
respondent-husband on 30.08.2018 at Bhavani Nagar, Pangal,
Nalgonda as per the prevailing customs in Hindu Religion. After
marriage, petitioner joined the company of the respondent and
lived in matrimonial house for a period 8 months. Thereafter,
respondent and his family members started to abuse the
petitioner in filthy language. Petitioner's mother-in-law used to
instigate the respondent to harass her physically and mentally.
Finally on 05.01.2024, unable to bear the torture of the respondent
2 LNA, J
and his family members, petitioner left the matrimonial home
and started living with her parents at Dilsukhnagar.
4. Later respondent filed H.M.O.P.No.58 of 2024 on the file of
the Family Court at Nalgonda under section 9 of Hindu Maraige
Act, 1955 for restitution of Conjugal Rights and the said case is
pending for adjudication. After filing the said case also,
respondent used to visit the petitioner at her parent's place and
torture her mentally to yield his requirements. Unable to bear the
torture of the respondent, petitioner filed F.I.R.No.367 of 2024,
dated 28.08.2024 for the offences punishable under Sections 85
BNS, 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, at Woman Police Station,
Saroornagar, Ranga Reddy District which is pending before III
Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, R.R.District at L.B. Nagar.
5. It is further stated that in view of the strained relationship
between the petitioner and the respondent, the petitioner cannot
travel alone from Dilshuknagar to Nalgonda for each and every
hearing. Petitioner is dependent on her parents and her parents
are not in a position to support her financially. Hence, prayed to
3 LNA, J
transfer H.M.O.P.No.58 of 2024, which is filed by the respondent,
from the Court of Nalgonda to Ranga Reddy District.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the
petitioner is a homemaker and she does not have any income and
is financially dependent on her parents who live on daily wages.
Therefore, it is difficult for the petitioner to travel 110 Kms to
Nalgonda on every date of hearing. Therefore, he prayed to
transfer the H.M.O.P.No.58 of 2024 filed by the respondent to the
Ranga Reddy Court. Learned counsel for the petitioner further
contended that in the transfer proceedings of matrimonial
disputes, the convenience of the wife has to be considered 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 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
2022 SCC Online SC 1199
4 LNA, J
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."
7. 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
(2023 SCC OnLine Bom 1926)
5 LNA, J
8. 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."
9. 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.
10. In the present, case, a perusal of the record discloses that
the petitioner is seeking transfer of the H.M.O.P. filed by the
respondent from the Judge, Family Court at Nalgonda, to the
Judge, Family Court, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar, on the
ground that she is a homemaker and she is dependent upon her
(2023 SCC OnLine Bom 1982)
6 LNA, J
parents and therefore, it is difficult for her to travel from
Dilshuknagar to Nalgonda on every date of adjournment.
Further, for every hearing, she has to take assistance from her
family members.
11. 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.
12. Accordingly, this Transfer C.M.P. is allowed and
H.M.O.P.No.58 of 2024 pending on the file of Judge, Family Court
at Nalgonda, is withdrawn and transferred to the Judge, Family
Court, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar, for disposal in
accordance with law.
13. The learned Judge, Family Court at Nalgonda, shall
transmit the entire original record in H.M.O.P.No.58 of 2024 duly
indexed, to the Court of the Judge, Family Court, Ranga Reddy
District at L.B.Nagar, preferably within a period of one month
from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
7 LNA, J
Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand
closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
__________________________________
LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY, J
Date: 25.02.2025
tssb
