APHC010333612025 I IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVAT! 0? MONDAY, THE ELEVENTH DAY OF AUGUST TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE 4 o ffl ■■ri o I'a!"!'. I', ■S' PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE V.GOPALA KRISHNA RAO TRANS. CIVIL MISC.PETITION NO: 199 OF 2025 Between: Band! @ Kalari Meenakshi, W/o.Bandi Venkata Karunya, aged about 26 years. House wife, R/o.Amurutha Nagar-3, 14*^ Street, Maduru Road Kothapalle Village and Post, Prodduturu Mandal, YSR Kadapa District A.P-516362. j ...Petitioner/Respondent AND Bandi Venkata Karunya, S/o.Srinivasulu, aged about 29 years, Occ; Panchayath Secretary, R/o.Sivaji Nagar, Komarolu Post and Mandal Prakasam District, A.P - 523373, Cell;8919895412. j ...Respondent/Petitioner Petition filed 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 H.M.O.P.No.84 of 2025 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Markapur, Prakasam District and transfer the same to the Senior Civil Judge, Proddatur, Kadapa District for trial and disposal in accordance with law. lA NO: 1 OF 202/; Petition filed under Section 1S1 rpr stated in the affidavit filed in support of pleased to stay of all further ^ ofthese ■ / “^'’®^P^°“®'''"9sinH.M.O.P.No.84 oftheSenrorCml Judge, Markapur Counsel for the Petitioner: Counsei for the Respondent; The Court made the may be of 2025 on the file pending disposal of the petition. Sri IWedara Siva Prasad : None appeared following: \M'\ nN\^^ THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.GOPALA KRISHNA RAO TRANSFER CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.199 of 2025 ORDER: Today when the matter is taken up for hearing, Sri M.Siva Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner has represented that the proof of service memo dated 23.07.2025, along with the postal track consignment sheet downloaded from the Postal Department Website is filed before the Registry and the same is placed on the record. As per the track consignment sheet, the registered notice sent to the respondent was served on him on 18.07.2025. Therefore, service held sufficient. None appeared for the respondent. The petitioner/wife filed the present petition under Section 24 of the 2. Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, seeking to withdraw H.M.O.P.No.84 of 2025, on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Markapur, Prakasam District and transfer the same to the Senior Civil Judge, Proddatur, Kadapa District. The case of the petitioner in brief is as follows: 3. The petitioner is the legally wedded wife of the respondent and their I. marriage has been performed at Proddatur, YSR Kadapa District on 21.04.2022, as per Hindu rites and customs. In view of the matrimonial disputes between both the parties, the petitioner/wife is staying at her parents’ house at Proddatur, YSR Kadapa District and depending upon the mercy of her parents. The learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that to cause inconvenience to the petitioner, the 2 respondent/husband filed H.M.O.P. No.84 of 2025, Prakasam District, on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Markapur, Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, II- Learned counsel for the being a woman under Section 9 of the seeking for restitution of conjugal rights. petitioner further contended that depending upon the the petitioner mercy of her parents, it is very difficult for her to travel at a distance of more than 170 Kms from to Markapur, Prakasam District Proddatur, YSR Kadapa District attending the Court for proceedings before the learned Senior Civil without any male Judge, support and that she against the H.M.O.P.No.84 of 2025, District and Proddatur, Kadapa District. Markapur, Prakasam District, was constrained to file the present petition respondent/husband seeking to withdraw the file of the Senior Civil on Judge, Markapur, Prakasam transfer the same to the Senior Civil Judge 4. Heard Sri M.Siva Prasad, registered notice sent to the for the respondent. Therefore available on record. The material learned counsel for the respondent was served petitioner. Though on him, none appeared service held sufficient. Perused the material 5. on record prima facie matrimonial disputes between both goes to show that in view of the the parties, the petitioner/wife is staying at her parents’ house at Proddatur YSR Kadapa District. The respondent/husband has filed H. Civil Judge, Markapur Marriage Act, 1955, M.O.P.No.84 of 2025, on the file of the Senior Prakasam District under Section 9 of the Hindu seeking for restitution of conjugal rights. 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 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, 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 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 H.M.O.P.No.84 of 2025, on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Markapur, Prakasam District and transfer the same to the Senior Civil Judge, Proddatur, Kadapa District. 6. / ,/ 7. In the result, the present petition is allowed and H.M.O.P.No.84 of 2025, on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Markapur, Prakasam District, is hereby withdrawn and transferred to the Senior Civil Judge, Proddatur, Kadapa District. The Senior Civil Judge, Markapur, Prakasam District, shall transmit 9. ^ 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 627 4 the case record in H.M.O.P.No.84 of 2025 Proddatur, Kadapa District, preferably within of the order. There shall be to the Senior Civil Judge, expeditiously as possible of receipt of a copy duly indexed as a period of two (02) weeks from the date no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous order granted earlier, if any, shall stand closed. petitions, if any pending and the Interim Sd/- SHAIK MOHD. RAFI assistant registrar //TRUE COPY// SE N OFFICER To, 1- The Civil Judge (Senior Division), Markapur Prakasam District. 2. The Civil Judge (Senior Division), Proddatur, Kadapa District. 3. Bandi @ Kalari Meenakshi. W/o.Bandi Nagar-3, Venkata Karunya. R/o.Amurutha Kothapalle Village and Post, A.P-516362. Occ; Panchayath Secretary, and Mandal, Prakasam District, A.P - 14*^ Street, Maduru Road, Prodduturu Mandal, YSR Kadapa District 4. Bandi Venkata Karunya, S/o.Srinivasulu R/o.Sivaji Nagar, Komarolu Post 523373, Cell;8919895412. 5. One CC to Sri Medara Siva Prasad, Advocate [OPUC] 6. Two CD Copies BSV vna HIGH COURT DATED: 11/08/2025 ORDER TRCMP NO. 199 OF 2025 ALLOWING THE TR.CMP WITHOUT COSTS