IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AMARAVATI THURSDAY ,THE NINTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V. GOPALA KRISHNA RAO TRANS. CIVIL MISC.PETITION NO: 153 OF 2024 Between: Kanuri Yamini, W/o. Kanuri Gowri, Hindu, Aged about 40 years, D.No. 74-19-3, Krishna Nagar, Opp Chaitanya Techno School, Vijayawada-7, Krishna District. ...PETITIONER AND Kanuri Gowri Shankar, S/o. K Mallikarjuna Rao, Aged about 43 Occ Credit Manager at HDB Bank, R/o. Ramulapeta, Via Vempalli, Yerragunta Village and Mandal, YSR Kadapa District - 520007 years ...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 the FCOP.No 99 of 2023 on the file of Family court Kadapa and transfer the same to Family Court Vijayawada. lA NO: 1 OF 2024 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances ^stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased to grant stay of all further proceedings in F.C.O.P.No 99 of 2023 on the file of Family Court, Kadapa. Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri. Yarramsetty Venkatesh Counsel for the Respondents: The Court made the following: ORDER % THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.GOPALA KRISHNA RAO TRANSFER CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.153 of 2024 ORDER: The petitioner/wife filed the present petition under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, seeking to withdraw F.C.O.P.No.99 of 2023 on the file of the Family Court, Kadapa and transfer the same to the Family Court, Vijayawada. 2. The case of the petitioner in brief is as follows: Due to the matrimonial disputes in between the spouses, the petitioner/wife is has been staying at her parents house at Vijayawada along with one child, aged about 8 years. [ii] The petitioner further pleaded that she has also filed a case under Section 498-IPC and Sections 3, 4 of D.P. Act before the Station House Officer, Patamata Police Station, which is pending against the respondent. The petitioner further pleaded that she has also filed maintenance case vide F.C.O.P.No.1284 of 2021 before the Family Court at Vijayawada. [iii] The petitioner also pleaded that to cause inconvenience to the petitioner/wife, the respondent/husband filed F.C.O.P.No.99 of 2023 before the Family Court at Kadapa under Section 13(i) (a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, for dissolution of marriage. [iii] The petitioner further pleaded that the distance in between Vijaybwada and Kadapa is approximately 300Kms and it is very difficult for her to appear before the Court at Kadapa any male support and that she i 3. Heard Sri Yerramsetty Venkatesh Though notice served on the respondent Perused the record. 5. Though the respondent engaged opportunity to the counsel for filing though the matter has been listed appeared for the respondent. on each and every adjournment without IS constrained to file this application, learned counsel for the petitioner, none appeared for the respondent. 4. a counsel and despite affording counter, no counter has been filed under the caption ‘for orders an and today, none 6. The Apex Court in a held by considering the fact that visit the place where the divorce transfer petition filed by the wife may be allowed. The Apex A.S.SaravanaKarthikSha^ held case of Geeta Heera Vs Harish Chander Heera’, - ‘if a wife does not have sufficient funds to petition is filed by her husband, then the Court in a case of as follows: N.C.V. Aishwarya Vs 9. The cardinal principle for exercise of power under Section 24 of the Code of Cvil Procedure is that the ends of justice shouid demand the appeal or other proceeding. In matrimonial transfer of the suit, 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 behavioural pattern, their standard thereto and the circumstances of both under whose protective umbrella they social strata of the spouses and their of life prior to the marriage and subsequent the parties in eking out their livelihood and are seeking their sustenance to life. Given (2000) 10 SCr 304 ^ 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 627 % 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 for the petitioner and in view of the ratio laid down by the Apex Court in the aforesaid case laws that in matrimonial proceedings, the convenience of the wife has to be considered than that of the inconvenience of the husband. Therefore, this 8. Court is of the considered view that there are grounds to consider the request of the petitioner to transfer the F.C.O.P.No.99 of 2023 on the file of the Family Court, Kadapa to the Family Court at Vijayawada. In the result, the Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is allowed and the F.C.O.P.No.99 of 2023 on the file of the Family Court, Kadapa is hereby withdrawn and transferred to the Court of to the XIV Additional District Judge- Cum-Family Court, Vijayawada. The learned Judge at Family Court, Kadapa shall transmit the case record in F.C.O.P.No.99 of 2023 to the Court of XIV Additional District Judge-Cum-Family Court, Vijayawada, 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. There shall be no order as to costs. 9. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending and the Interim order granted earlier, if any, shall stand closed. SD/- N NAGAMMA ASSISTANT REGISTER //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Judge, Family Court Kadapa. 2. The XIV Additional District Judge-cum- Family Court Vijayawada. 3. One CC to Sri. Yarramsetty Venkatesh Advocate [OPUC] 4. Three CD Copies PNM vna HIGH COURT DATED:09/01/2025 ORDER TRCMP.No.153 of 2024 2 2 JAN 2C2) ^ Current bectton (fX Co AALOWING THE TR.C.M.P WITHOUT COSTS