k IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI TUESDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENUTHURUMALLI GOPALA KRISHNA RAO TRANS. CIVIL MISC.PETITION NO: 250 OF 2024 Between: Mekala Manasa, W/o. Lankotala Venkata Shesanka, aged 32 years, Occ. Private Employee, Residing at D.No. 12-2-50/1, Ashok Nagar, Anantapuramu Town, Anantapuramu District. ...PETITIONER/RESPONDENT AND Lankotala Venkata Sasanka, S/o. Late L. Vasudevudu, Aged 34 years, Occ. Soft Ware Engineer, Residing at 97/33-1-1, Utukuru, C.K. Dinne Mandal, Kadapa District. ...RESPONDENT/PETITIONER 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 transfer the F.C.O.P. No. 99 of 2024 on the file of the Family Judge Court, Kadapa to Family Judge Court, Anantapuramu. 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 may be pleased to transfer the F.C.O..P. No. 99 of 2024 on the file of the Family Judge Court, Kadapa to Family Judge Court, Anantapuramu. ft" •* Counsel for the Petitioner : SRI SESHADRI GOALLA i i: Counsel for the Respondent: SRI MUJTAHID HUSSAIN The Court made the following ORDER : ^ r THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.GOPALA KRISHNA RAO TRANSFER CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.250 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 2024, on the file of the Judge, Family Court, Kadapa and transfer the same to the Judge, Family Court, Anantapuramu. The case of the petitioner in brief is as follows; 2. I. The petitioner is the legally wedded wife of the respondent and their marriage has been performed at Ananatapuram on 31.10.2021 as per Hindu rites and customs. During their wedlock, the petitioner and the respondent were blessed with a child aged about 2 years. In view of the matrimonial disputes between both the parties, the petitioner/wife along with her child is staying at her relatives’ house at Anantapuram. The petitioner pleaded that she had lodged a complaint before the Bukkaraya Samudram Police Station, Ananthapuram District, under Section 85 r/w 3(5) BNS and under Sections 3 & 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act vide FIR.No. 158 of 2024 against the respondent/husband and the same is pending for investigation. The petitioner contend that to cause inconvenience to her, the respqndent/husband has filed F.C.O.P.No.99 of 2024, on the file of the Judge, Family Court, Kadapa, under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 seeking for restitution of conjugal rights, 2 Learned counsel for the petitioner further contended that the petitioner being a woman having a child aged about 2 years, depending upon her difficult for her to travel at a distance of more than relatives, it is very lOOKms from Kadapa District to Anantapuram District without any male support and that she was constrained to file the present petition against respondent/husband seeking to seeking to withdraw F.C.O.P.No.99 the file of the Judge, Family Court, Kadapa and transfer the the of 2024, on same to the Judge, Family Court, Anantapuramu. Heard Sri Goalla Seshadri, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Mujtahid Hussain, learned counsel for the respondent. Perused the material available on record. 4. counter affidavit and the learned would contend that respondent/husband 2023 and he is working as a Private The respondent/husband filed a counsel for the respondent underwent a Knee-Surgery in the year. Employee and is staying at Kadapa and as such, requested to dismiss the transfer petition filed by the petitioner/wife. 6. The material on record prima facie goes to show that the father of the 5. of the matrimonial disputes between petitioner/wife is no more and in view the petitioner/wife along with her child aged about 2 years is both the parties staying at her relatives disputed by the respondent/husband. house at Ananthapur District and the same is not at all 3 The Apex Court in a case of N.C.V. Aishwarya Vs A.S.Saravana Karthik Sha'' held as follows: “9, The cardinal principle for exercise of power under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure is that the ends ofjustice 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, 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 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. are On considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and in view of the ratio laid down in the aforesaid case law that in matrimonial proceedings, the convenience of the wife has to be considered than that of the inconvenience of the husband. Therefore, this Court is of the considered view that there are grounds to consider the request of the petitioner/wife to withdraw F.C.O.P.No.99 of 2024, on the file of the Judge, y Family Court, Kadapa and transfer the same to the Judge, Family Court, Anantapuramu. 7. In the result, the present petition is allowed and F.C.O.P.No.99 of 2024, the file of the Judge, Family Court, Kadapa, is hereby withdrawn and transferred to the Judge, Family Court, Anantapuramu. The Judge, Family Court, Kadapa, shall transmit the case record in F.C.O.P.No.99 of 2024 to the 8. on I ^ 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 627 4 Judge, Family Court, Anantapuramu 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 Judge, Family Court, Anantapuramu on 08.05.2025 at 10.30 a.m. There shall be no order to costs. as As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending and the Interim order granted earlier, if any, shall stand closed. SDI- B.PRASADA RAO ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The District & Sessions Judge, Kadapa. 2. The District & Sessions Judge, Ananthapuram. 3. Mekala Manasa, W/o. Lankotala Venkata Shesanka, aged 32 Occ. Private Employee, Residing at D.No. 12-2-50/1 Anantapuramu Town, Anantapuramu District. 4. Lankotala Venkata Sasanka, S/o. Late L. Vasudevudu, Aged 34 Occ. Soft Ware Engineer, Residing at 97/33-1-1, Utukuru Mandal, Kadapa District. 5. The Family Judge Court, Kadapa. 6. The Family Judge Court, Anantapuramu. 7. One CC to SRI. SESHADRI GOALLA Advocate [OPUC] 8. One CC to SRI. MUJTAHID HUSSAIN Advocate [OPUC] 9. THREE CD COPIES years, Ashok Nagar, years, C.K. Dinne Chp TAG HIGH COURT DATED: 18/02/2025 ORDER TRCMP.No.250 of 2024 Ot' * 0 MAR 2C25 o\ ^ , Curreni aeawn ALLOWING THE TR.CMP.