IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI THURSDAY. THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V. GOPALA KRISHNA RAO TRANS. CIVIL MISC.PETITION NO: 121 OF 2024 Petition Under Section 24 of the C.P.C. is filed praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed there with, the High Court may be pleased to withdraw the F.C.O.P.No.394 of 2023, on the file of the Family Court-cum-VI Additional District and Sessions Judge, Nellore and transfer the same to the Family Court, Visakhapatnam. Between: Jyesta Hema Nikitha @ Hema Chowdary, W/o. N. Sai Hemanth Kumar, D/o. Jyesta Ayodhya Ramu Aged 28 years, Occ Advocate, R/o. Door No. 31-51-5, Plot. No. 403, Green City Heights, Palm Street, Visakhapatnam (Rural), Visakhapatnam District-530049. ...PETITIONER AND Nallapaneni Sai Hemanth Kumar, S/o. Nallapaneni Ramesh Kumar aged 30 years, Occ Self Employed, R/o. Door.No. 26-2-29, 2nd Lane, Rithwik Enclave, AK Nagar, Nellore, SPSR Nellore District -524004. ...RESPONDENT lA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition under Section 151 CPC is filed praying that in the , circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to stay all further proceedings in F.C.O.P.No.394 of 2023 on the file of the Family Court-cum-VI Additional District & Sessions Judge, Nellore, Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI MADHAVA RAO NALLURI Counsel for the Respondent: SRI UMESH CHANDRA P V G The Court made the following ORDER : s. THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.GOPALA KRISHNA RAO TRANSFER CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.121 of 2024 ORDER: The petitioner/wife filed the present petition under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, seeking to withdraw the F.C.O.P.No.394 of 2023, on the file of the Family Court-cum-VI Additional District & Sessions Judge, Nellore and transfer the same to the Judge, Family Court at Visakhapatnam, for trial. 2. The case of the petitioner in brief is as follows: The petitioner is none other than the wife of the respondent/husband and their marriage was performed on 11.08.2022 at Green City Function Hall, Visakhapatnam, as per Hindu Rites and Caste Customs. In view of the matrimonial disputes in between both the spouses; the petitioner/wife has been residing along with her nine (9) months baby at her parents’ house at Visakhapatnam. The petitioner/wife further pleaded that, to cause unnecessary inconvenience to her the husband/respondent filed F.C.O.P,No.394 of 2023, on the file of the Family Court-cum-VI Additional District & Sessions Judge, Nellore, under Section 13(l)(ia) of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, r/w under Section 7 of Family Courts Act, 1984, seeking for divorce and the same is pending for adjudication. Tr.C.M.P.No.l21of 2024 VGKR, J 2 III. The petitioner/wife further contended that, the distance between Visakhapatnam and Nellore is approximately more than 600 Kms, she being a women along with her nine (9) months baby and depending upon her parents, it is very difficult for her to travel from Visakhapatnam to Nellore to attend the Court proceedings on each and every adjournment without any male support, and that she is seeking to withdraw the ( F.C.O.P.No.394 of 2023, on the file of the Family Court-cum-VI Additional District & Sessions Judge, Nellore and transfer the same to the Judge, Family Court at Visakhapatnam. Fleard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for 3. the respondent through virtual mode. Perused the material available on record. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent would contend that the 5. respondent filed his counter-affidavit before the Registry and the same is placed on record. It was contended by the learned counsel for the respondent 6. through virtual mode that the petitioner/wife leveled false allegations against the respondent/husband in her counter-affidavit and she approached this Court with baseless allegations with unclean hands and that she is not entitled the relief of transfer of the present case as sought for. Learned counsel for the respondent would further Tr.C.M.P.No.l21of 2024 VGKR,J 3 contended that the parents of the respondent/herein are the senior citizens. 7. The law is well settled by the Hon’ble Apex Court in a transfer of Civil Miscellaneous Petitions, the High Court is not supposed to enter into the merits or demerits of the case, which matter is pending before the trial Court. Learned counsel for the respondent fairly contended that through virtual mode that instead of transferring the present matter from Nellore to Visakhapatnam, the case may be transferred to Vijayawada, which is convenient to both the parties. I am not inclined to accept the contention raised by the learned counsel for the respondent, because none of the parties are staying at Vijayawada. The Apex Court in a case of Geeta Heera Vs Harish Chander Heera\ held by considering the fact that “if a wife does 8. 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. The Apex Court in a case of N.C.V. Aishwarya Vs A.S.SaravanaKarthikSha^ held as follows: 9. “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, ^ (2000) 10 see 304 ^ 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 627 Tr.C.M.P.No.l21of 2024 VGKR, J 4 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. ” On considering the submissions made by the learned counsel 10. appearing for both sides and on considering the facts and circumstances of the case, since the petitioner/wife has been residing along with her nine (9) months baby at her parents’ house at Visakhapatnam. In view of the ratio laid down in the aforesaid case laws that in matrimonial proceedings, the convenience of the wife has to be taken into consideration than that of the inconvenience of the husband. Therefore, I am of the considered view that there are justifiable grounds to consider the request of the petitioner/wife seeking to withdraw the F.C.O.P.No.394 of 2023, on the file of the Family Court-cum-VI Additional District & Sessions Judge, Nellore and transfer the same to the Judge, Family Court at Visakhapatnam. In the result, the Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is allowed and the F.C.O.P.No.394 of 2023, on the file of the Family Court-cum-VI Additional District & Sessions Judge, Nellore, is hereby withdrawn and transferred to the Judge, Family Court at Visakhapatnam. The learned Family Court-cum-VI Additional District & Sessions Judge, Nellore, shall transmit the case record 11. in Tr,C.M.P.No.l21of 2024 VGKR, J ^ . 5 Visakhapatnam. The learned Family Court-cum-VI Additional District & Sessions Judge, Nellore, shall transmit the case record in F.C.O.P.No.394 of 2023 to the Judge, Family Court at Visakhapatnam, duly indexed as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of two (02) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Both the parties are directed to appear before the Judge, Family Court at Visakhapatnam, on 17.03.2025, 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. Sd/- B CHITTI JOSEPH ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Family Court-cum-VI Additional District and Sessions Judge, Nellore SPSR Nellore District. 2. The Family Court, Visakhapatnam, District. 3. One CC to Sri. Madhava Rao Nalluri, Advocate [OPUC] 4. One CC to Sri. Umesh Chandra P V G, Advocate [OPUC] 5. Three CD Copies SD vna / •A i ( HIGH COURT DATED:23/01/2025 ORDER TRCMP.No.121 of 2024 AND«^ /i 0 I FEB 2025 '/X s-lO C9 ■^u ^ Current Section ^ ALLOWING THE TRCMP