Telangana High Court
Vemula Anitha Bhushini Anitha, vs Vemula Santosh, on 19 June, 2025
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY
TRANSFER CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.465 of 2024
ORDER:
This Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed
seeking to transfer of H.M.O.P.No.97 of 2024 on the file of the
learned Senior Civil Judge Court, at Kamareddy to the Court
of learned Senior Civil Judge Court, at Nizamabad District.
2. Heard Mr. Y.Prakash, learned counsel for the petitioner
on record. No representation on behalf of the respondent
despite service of notice. Therefore, the matter is disposed of
basing on the material available on record.
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 19.03.2014 at Sherkhan
Pally village, Nizam Sagar Mandal, Nizamabad District as per
the prevailing customs in their community and soon after
their marriage the petitioner joined the company of
respondent and out of their wedlock, they were blessed with
one son. It is averred that the petitioner was subjected to
physical and mental harassment by the respondent who is
addicted to alcohol and therefore, she left matrimonial house
and is now living with her parents at Mallaram, Nizamabad.
LNA, J
The petitioner has filed Maintenance Case No.13 of 2019
before II Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, at
Nizamabad and has also filed O.P.No.72 of 2019 before Senior
Civil Judge, Nizamabad seeking judicial separation by reason
of cruelty and same is pending. In the meanwhile, respondent
herein filed H.M.O.P.No.97 of 2024 on the file of the learned
Senior Civil Judge Court, at Kamareddy for dissolution of the
marriage.
3.1. It is further averred that at present, she is taking
shelter in her parent's house and is financially dependent on
her parents and she has to take care of her minor child.
Moreover, the distance between Mallaram and Kamareddy is
more than 130 Kilometres, therefore, it is difficult for the
petitioner to travel from Mallaram to Kamareddy to attend the
H.M.O.P. In those set of circumstances, the petitioner filed
the present Tr.C.M.P.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner apart from
reiterating the averments made in the Tr.C.M.P, contended
that respondent is appearing in the M.C.No.13 of 2019 and
O.P.No.72 of 2019 filed by the petitioner which are pending at
Nizamabad. Therefore, if the matter is transferred from file of
the learned Senior Civil Judge Court, at Kamareddy to the
LNA, J
Court of learned Senior Civil Judge Court, at Nizamabad
District, no prejudice would be caused to the respondent and
further contended that convenience of wife has to be
considered as against the convenience of the husband in the
matrimonial matter and hence, prayed to allow the present
Tr.C.M.P.
5. This Court considered the submissions made by learned
counsel for the petitioner and perused the material available on
record.
6. The underlying principle governing the proceedings under
Section 24 of the CPC seeking transfer of the case, appeal or
other proceedings, is enunciated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court
in a catena of judgments and the same was followed by various
High Courts.
7. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in NCV Aishwarya Vs.
A.S.Saravana Karthik Sha 1 held as follows:
" 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
2022 SCC Online SC 1199
LNA, J
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. The principle of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in N.C.V.Aishwarya's case (3rd 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)
LNA, J
9. 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 (3rd cited supra) and
Devika Dhiraj Patil Nee Devika Jayprakash Buttepatil's
case (4th cited supra), and held as follows:-
"The underlying principle governing the
proceedings under Section 24 of the CPC, is
that convenience of the wife is to be preferred
over the convenience of the husband."
10. 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 give preference to the
convenience of the wife over the convenience of the husband.
11. The present Tr.C.M.P is filed principally on the ground
that she is dependent upon her parents and she has to take
care of her minor child and therefore, it is difficult for her to
travel from Mallaram to Kamareddy on every date of
adjournment. Further, for every hearing, she has to take
assistance from her family members.
(2023 SCC OnLine Bom 1982)
LNA, J
12. It is also relevant to note that the MC.No.13 of 2019
and O.P.No.72 of 2019 are pending at Nizamabad, whereas
H.M.O.P filed by the respondent-husband is pending before
the Court at Kamareddy and the respondent is appearing in
the said cases and therefore, no prejudice would be caused to
respondent if the H.M.O.P.No.97 of 2024 is transferred to
Nizamabad.
13. Therefore, taking into consideration the facts and
circumstances of the case and 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 wife has to be given priority/preference
over the convenience of the husband, this Tr.CMP deserves to
be allowed.
14. Accordingly, this Tr.C.M.P. is allowed and
H.M.O.P.No.97 of 2024 on the file of the learned Senior Civil
Judge Court, at Kamareddy is transferred to the Court of
learned Senior Civil Judge Court, at Nizamabad District in
accordance with law.
15. The learned Senior Civil Judge Court, at Kamareddy
shall transmit the entire original record in H.M.O.P.No.97 of
2024, duly indexed, to the Court of learned Senior Civil Judge
LNA, J
Court, at Nizamabad District, preferably within a period of
one (1) month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
16. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand
closed. There shall be no order as to costs.
__________________________________
LAXMI NARAYANA ALISHETTY, J
19th June, 2025
PSW
