APHC010151172025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI MONDAY. THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF JULYfS TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE f PRESENT HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENUTHURUMALLI GOPALA KRISHNA RAO TRANSFER CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION NO: 103 OF 2025 Between: Tadisetti Jnana Naga Prasanna @ Chennuboina Jnana Naga Prasanna, W/o Tadisetti Siva NageswaraRao D/o Balaji Rao Aged about 28 years, R/o D.No.4-78-44, Vanapalligudem, 3rd ward, Tadepalligudem W.G. District. ...Petitioner AND Tadisetti-Siva Nageswara Rao, S/o SrinivasaRao, Male, Aged about 32 years, R/o D.NO.4-107-2, 6th ward, Macbavaram village Ponnur Mandal, Guntur District, Presently working at NLC India Limited Company at Naiveli, Tamilandu State as Deputy Executive Engineer. ...Respondent Petition Under Section 24 of the C.P.C. Praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to withdraw and H.M.O.P. No. 22 of 2025 on the file of Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division) Bapatia to be Court of Civil Judge (Senior Division) Tadepalligudem, West Godavari District or any other competent court Tadepalligudem. lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated m the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings in H.M.O.P. No. 22 of 2025 on the file of Court of the Civil Judge(Senior Division); Bapatla. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI. V SATYANARAYANA NEKKANTI Counsel for the Respondent: SRI. V SRINIVASULA REDDY The Court made the following order: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.GOPALA KRISHNA RAO IRANSFER civil miscellaneous petition N0.1Q3 of ORDER: The petitioner/wife filed the present petition under Section 24 Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, seeking to withdraw H.M.O.P.No.22 of 2025 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Bapatia and transfer the Senior Civil Judge Court, Tadepalligudem, West Godavari District. of the same to the 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 at Tadepalligudem, West Godavari District on 01.02.2023, as per Hindu rites and customs. In view of the matrimonial disputes between both the parties, the petitioner/wife is string at her parents’ house at Tadepalligudem, West Godavari District and depending upon the mercy of her parents. The petitioner pleaded that she had lodged a complaint before the Station House Officer, Tadepalligudem Town Police Station under Section 85 BNS and Sections 3 & 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act vide Cr.No.65 of 2025 and the same is pending for investigation. The petitioner further pleaded that she had filed a Domestic Violence Case vide D.V.C.(SR)No.1042 of 2025 and a Maintenance Case vide M.C.(SR)No.1041 of 2025 under on the file of the Junior Civil Judge Court, Tadepalligudem, West Godavari. --, , „The learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that to cause 2 inconvenience to the petitioner, the respondent/husband had filed H.M.O.P.No.22 of 2025, under Section 13(1)(ia) of the dissolution of marriage. II- Learned counsel for the being a woman on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Bapatia Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, seeking for petitioner further contended that depending upon the the petitioner mercy of her parents, it is very more than 200Kms from proceedings before the difficult for her to travel at a distance of Tadepalligudem to Baptia for learned Senior Civil adjournment without file the withdraw H.M.O.P.No.22 of 2025 Bapatia and transfer Tadepalligudem, West Godavari attending the case Judge, Bapatia on each and every date of any male support and that she present petition against the was constrained to respondent/husband seeking on the file of the Senior Civil to Judge, Civil Judge Court, the same to the Senior District. 3- Learned counsel for the grounds to allow the transfer from Senior Civil Tadepalligudem, West Godavari the present transfer civil mi respondent is working State in NLC India Limited respondent would contend that there petition filed by the petitioner are no seeking transfer Judge, Bapatia to the Senior Civil Judge Court, Court to dismiss contended that the District and requested this miscellaneous petition. He further a Deputy Executive Engineer Company at Naiveli, if this Court i as at Naiveli, Tamilnadu IS inclined to 3 / transfer the case from Bapatia toTadepalligudem, the personal attendance of the respondent/husband may be dispensed with before the transferee Court. / 4. Heard Sri V.Satyanarayana Nekkanti, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri V.Srinivasulu Reddy, learned counsel for the respondent. Perused the material available on record. 5. The material on record prima facie goes to show that in view of the matrimonial disputes between both the parties, the petitioner/wife is staying at her parents’ house at Tadepalligudem, West Godavari District and depending upon the mercy of her parents and she had filed a Criminal Case against the respondent/husband vide Cr.No.65 of 2025 and the same is pending for investigation. Further, the petitioner had filed a Domestic Violence Case vide D.V.C.(SR)No.1042 of 2025 and a Maintenance Case vide M.C.(SR)No.1041 of 2025, on the file of the Junior Civil Judge Court, Tadepalligudem, West Godavarr-The respondent/husband has filed H.M.O.P.No.22 of 2025, on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Bapatia, under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, seeking for dissolution of marriage. 6. The Apex Court in a case of GEETA HEERA Vs HARISH CHANDER HEERA\ 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.” ^ (2000) 10 see 304 4 7. Apex Court i Karthik Sha^ held as follows: in a case of N.C.V.Aishwarya Vs A.S.Saravana 9. The cardinel principle for Code of Civil Procedure i of the suit, appeal Courts are called upor. to consider the plea of trartsfer. take into consideration the exercise of power under Section 24 of the IS that the ends ofjustice should demand or other proceeding. In matrimonial the transfer matters, wherever the Courts have to strata of fhe -oaodoess ofboth the parties, the strata of the spouses and their behavioural pattern to the social their standard of life prior marriage and subsequent thereto and the parties in eking out their livelihood circumstances of both the and under whose protective umbrella they Given the prevailing socio- economic must H , u. convenience which must be looked at while considering transfer. are seeking their sustenance to life, paradigm in the Indian 8. On considering the submissions appearing for both sides and i case laws that in matrimonial be considered than that of the i Court is of the considered vi of the petitioner/wife to withdraw made by the learned counsel view of the ratio laid down in the aforesaid proceedings, the convenience of the wife in has to inconvenience of the husband. Therefore this view that there are grounds to consider the request H.M.O.P.No.22 of 2025, and transfer the on the file of the same to the Senior Civil Judge on considering the Senior Civil Judge. Bapatia Court, Tadepalligudem, West submissions made by the learned respondent /hosband is working as a Deputy Executive Tamilnadu State in NIC India Limited Godavari District. Further, counsel for the respondent, as the Engineer at Naiveli, Company at Naiveli, the respondent/husband has been dispensed personal attendance of the with before the ^ 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 627 5 transferee Court, except on the days when his presence is required before the learned Senior Civil Judge Court, Tadepalligudem, West Godavari District. 9. In the result, the present petition is allowed and H.M.O.P.No.22 of 2025, on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Bapatia, is hereby withdrawn and transferred to the Senior Civil Judge Court, Tadepalligudem, West Godavari District. The Senior Civil Judge, Bapatia, shall transmit the case record in H.M.O.P.No.22 of 2025 to the Senior Civil Judge Court, Tadepalligudem, West Godavari District, 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. Both the parties are directed to appear before the Senior Civil Judge Court, Tadepalligudem, West Godavari District, on 20.08.2025, at 10.30.a.m., later the learned Senior Civil Judge, Tadepalligudem, West Godavari District, is directed not to insist for the personal appearance of the responderft/husband i.e., the petitioner in H.M.O.P.No.22 of 2025, as long as his counsel is attending the Court proceedings and representing the case except on the day when re-conciliation proceedings are being taken up or on the day when his cross-examination is required to be recorded or on any other day when his personal appearance is required as directed by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Tadepalligudem, West Godavari District. There shall be no order as to costs. 1 6 As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending and the Interim order granted earlier, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/- K J RAJA BABU ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// section officer To 1. The Civil Judge (Senior Division) Bapatia, Guntur District. 2. The Civil Judge (Senior Division) Tadepalligudem, West Godavari District. 3. Tadisetti Jnana Naga Prasanna @ Chennuboina Jnana Naga Prasanna, W/o Tadisetti Siva NageswaraRao D/o Balaji Rao Aged about 28 years R/o D.No.4-78-44, Vanapalligudem, 3rd ward Tadepalligudem W.G. District. 4. Tadisetti Siva Nageswara Rao, S/o SrinivasaRao, Male, Aged about 32 years R/o D.NO.4-107-2, 6th ward, Macbavaram village Ponnur Mandal, Guntur District, Presently working at NLC India Limited Company at Naiveli, Tamilandu State as Deputy Executive Engineer. 5. One CC to Sri. V Satyanarayana Nekkanti, Advocate [OPUC] 6. One CC to Sri. V Srinivasula Reddy, Advocate [OPUC] 7. Two CD Copies PR sree high court DATED:28/07/2025 Both the parties before the are directed to appeat Civil Judge (senior division) Court, Tadapalligudem, West Godavari District. \ ORDER TRCMP no. 103 OF 2025 •^2 ^ 0 5 AUf; 2t)'>5 S Current Section . ALLOWING THE TRCMP WITHOUT COSTS