I APHC010401562025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI <5> THURSDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER|g TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE >1' ■■ Ik 0.% PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE V. GOPALA KRISHNA RAO TRANS. CIVIL MISC.PETITION NO: 247 OF 2025 Between: Meduri Lalitha, W/o.K.Vinay Kumar, aged 28 years, D/o.M.Sridhar, R/o.Flat No.303, Lakshmi Nivas, Annavarappadu, Second Line, Ongole, Prakasam District - 523 001. ...Petitioner/Respondent AND Kraleti Vinay Kumar, S/o.K.Sambamurthy, Hindu, aged 31 years, R/o.D.No.45-48-3, Abid Nagar, Akkayyapalem, Visakhapatnam - 530016. ...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 transfer the Family Court Original Petition, being FCOP No.960 of 2025 from the Court of the Principal Family Judge, Visakhapatnam to the Court of the Family Court, Ongole or any other competent Court at Ongole. X. r lA NO: 1 OF 2025 Petition filed 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 stay all further proceedings before the Court of the Principal Family Judge, Visakhapatnam in FCOP No.960 of 2025, pending disposal of the present Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition before this Court. Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri Varun Byreddy Counsel for the Respondent: None appeared The Court made the following: -y- v. / r APHC010401562025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3397] THURSDAY, THE FOURTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENUTHURUMALLI GOPALA KRISHNA RAO TRANS. CIVIL MISC.PETITION NO: 247/2025 Between: 1.MEDURI LALITHA,, W/0. K. VINAY KUMAR, AGED 28 YEARS, D/0. M. SRIDHAR, R/0. FLAT NO.303, ANNAVARAPPADU, SECOND LINE ONGOLE, PRAKASAM DIST - 523 001. LAKSHMI NIVAS, ...PETITIONER AND 1.KRALETI VINAY KUMAR, S/o. K.Sambamurthy, Hindu, aged 31 years, R/o. D.No.45-48-3, Abid Nagar, Akkayypalem, Visakhapatnam - 530016. ...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 transfer the Family Court Original Petition, being FCOP No.960 of 2025 from the court of the Principal Family Judge, Visakhapatnam to the Court of the Hon'ble Family Court, Ongole, or any other competent court at Ongole In the interest of justice lA NO: 1 OF 2025 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 stay all further proceedings before the court of the Principal Family Judge, Visakhapatnam in FCOP No.960 of 2025, pending disposal of the present Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition before this Hon’ble Court Counsel for the Petitioner: 1.VARUN BYREDDY Counsel for the Respondent: 1. n The Court made the following: ORDER: Today, when the matter has been taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that, proof of service Memo has been field before the Registry, dated 29.08.2025, along with the postal Track Consignment Sheet downloaded from the Postal Department Website 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 13.08.2025. None appeared for the respondent. Therefore, ‘service held sufficient. petitioner/wife herein filed the present petition under Section 24 of of Civil Procedure, 1908, (for ‘short the C.P.C.’) seeking for transfer 2. The the Code of F.C.O.P.No.960 of 2025 on the file of the Principal Family Judge, Visakhapatnam, to the file of the Judge, Family Court, Ongole, Prakasam District, for trial. The case of the petitioner in brief is as follows; 3. The petitioner is the legally wedded wife of the respondent/husband and their marriage was performed on 27.03.2024, in the presence of elders and relatives of both the parties, at TTD Kalyana Mandapam, as per the Hindu Rites and Caste Customs. After that, due to the matrimonial disputes between both the spouses, the petitioner/wife has I. been residing separately and depending upon the mercy of her parents at Ongole, Prakasam District. The petitioner/wife further pleaded that, in view of the harassment made by the respondent/husband, the the complaint against petitioner/wife lodge a respondent/husband dated 16.04.2025, in F.I.R.No.23 of 2025, for the offences punishable under Sections 85, 115(2), 351(2) r/w 3(5) of B.N.S. Act, 2023 and Sections 3 & 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, before the Disha Mahila Police Station, Ongole, after completion of investigation. Police filed a charge sheet and the same was numbered vide C.C.No.672 of 2025, on the file of the II Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Ongole, Prakasam District and she also filed a Maintenance Case vide M.C.No.19 of 2025 on the file of the Judge, Family Court, Ongole, Prakasam District, under Section 144 of B.N.S.S. Act, 2023, seeking monthly maintenance from the respondent/husband and the said two (2) cases are pending for adjudication. Learned counsel for the petitioner would further contend that to cause inconvenience her, the respondent/husband had filed F.C.O.P.No.960 of 2025 on the file of the Principal Family Judge, Visakhapatnam, under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, seeking restitution of conjugal rights and the is also pending for adjudication. Learned counsel for the petitioner would further contended that, the petitioner being a woman and also residing separately and depending upon the mercy of her parents at Ongole and the distance between Ongole and Visakhapatnam is more than 500 Kms, it is very difficult for her to travel to attend the case proceedings before the Court at Visakhapatnam without any male assistance and that she same IV. was constrained to file the present petition against the respondent/husband herein, seeking for transfer of F.C.O.P.No.960 of 2025 on the file of the Principal Family Judge, Visakhapatnam, to the file of the Judge, Family Court, Ongole, Prakasam District. 4. Heard Sri Varun Byreddy, learned counsel for the petitioner. 5. Though registered notice sent to the respondent was served on him none appeared for the respondent. Therefore, ‘service held sufficient’. 6. Perused the material available on record. 7. The material on record prima facie goes to shows that, in view of the matrimonial disputes between both the spouses, the petitioner/wife has been residing separately and depending upon the mercy of her parents at Ongole and she has instituted two (02) cases against the respondent/hus band herein Wf i.e., C.C.No.672 of 2025, on the file of the II Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Ongole and Maintenance Case vide M.C.No.19 of 2025 on the file of the Judge, Family Court, Ongole, Prakasam District, the aforesaid cases pending for adjudication and the respondent/husband is also attending the Court proceedings before the competent Courts at Ongole, Prakasam District. The material on record further discloses that, the respondent/husband had are filed F.C.O.P.No.960 of 2025 on the file of the Principal Family Judge, Visakhapatnam, under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, seeking restitution of conjugal rights and the same is also pending for adjudication. The Apex Court in a case of N.C.V. Aishwarya Vs A.S.Saravana 8. 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 9. " 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 627 "'Jy -‘i-i 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 made by the petitioner/wife seeking for transfer of F.C.O.P.No.960 of the file of the Principal Family Judge, Visakhapatnam, to the file of the Judge, Family Court, Ongole, Prakasam District. request 2025 on the present Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is allowed and the F.C.O.P.No.960 of 2025 on the file of the Principal Family 10. In the result. Judge, Visakhapatnam, is hereby withdrawn and transferred to the file of the Judge, Family Court, Ongole, Prakasam District. The learned Principal Family Visakhapatnam, shall transmit the case record in F.C.O.P.No.960 of Judge, 2025, to the file of the Judge, Family Court, Ongole, Prakasam District, 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. miscellaneous petitions, if any pending and the Interim Order granted earlier, if any, shall stand closed. As a sequel Sd/- G HELA NAIDU ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To, 1. The Judge, Principal Family Court, Visakhapatnam, Visakhapatnam District. 2. The Judge, Family Court, Ongole, Prakasam District. ; > R/o.Flat No.303, Ongole, Prakasam Kumar, D/o.M.Sridhar Annavarappadu, Second Line 3. Meduri Lalitha, W/o.K.Vinay Lakshmi Nivas District - 523 001. s;o.K.Sambamurthy, R/o.D.No.45-48-3, Abid - 530016. Sri Varun Byreddy, Advocate [OPUC] 4. Kraleti Vinay Kumar Nagar, Akkayyapalem, Visakhapatnam 5. OneCCto 6. Two CD Copies BSV vna HIGH COURT DATED:04/09/2025 ORDER SEP 2025 rrentSecti TRCMP NO. 247 OF 2025 Co ★ •a ALLOWING THE TR.CMP WITHOUT COSTS