APHC010405142025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3397] TUESDAY,THE SIXTEENTH DAY OF SEPTEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENUTHURUMALLI GOPALA KRISHNA RAO TRANS. CIVIL MISC.PETITION NO: 248/2025 Between: 1. M. VENKATA RAMANA, S/O LATE KRISHNUDU, AGED 40 YEARS, PVT. EMPLOYEE, R/O MARKANDEYA STREET, ATMAKURTOWN, KURNOOL DISTRICT. ...PETITIONER AND 1. M RADHIKA, W/o M. Venkata Ramana, D/o K. Kapileswaraiah, Aged 34 Years R/o H.No. 44/156, Prakasham Nagar, Kurnool Town and District ...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 topleased to withdraw the F.C.O.P. No. 143 OF 2024 pending before In the Hon'ble I Family court Cum-IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kurnooland transfer to any other competent family court for trial and disposal at Vijayawada, in accordance with law and pass IA 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 pleased to order Stay of all further proceedings including appearance of the petitioner in F.C.O.P. No. 143 OF 2024 pending before In the Hon'ble Family court Cum- IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kurnool and pass Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. REGULAGADDA VENKATESH Counsel for the Respondent: 1. J JANAKIRAMI REDDY The Court made the following: ORDER: The petitioner/husband herein filed the present petition under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, (for short „the C.P.C.‟) seeking for withdrawal of F.C.O.P.No.143 of 2024 on the file of the Family Court-cum-IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kurnool and to transfer the same to any other competent Family Court at Vijayawada, Krishna District, for trial. 2. The case of the petitioner in brief is as follows: I. The petitioner is legally wedded husband of the respondent/wife and the marriage of the petitioner with the respondent was solemnized on 06.12.2014, in the presence of family members & relatives of both the parties, as per the Hindu rites and customs, at Kamma Sangam Function Hall, Kurnool. Out of their wedlock, they begot a female child on 12.08.2016. Later, due to matrimonial disputes, the petitioner/ husband has been residing separately, at Hyderabad. II. The petitioner/husband further pleaded that the respondent/wife lodged a complaint against the petitioner/ husband and his family members on 27.06.2020, which was registered as F.I.R.No.37 of 2020 before the Disha Police Station, Kurnool, for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A & 313 r/w Section 34 IPC and Sections 3 & 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 and the same pending for investigation. She also filed two (02) other cases against the petitioner/husband herein vide F.C.M.C.No.56 of 2021 before the Family Court-cum-IV Additional Judge, Kurnool, seeking maintenance and D.V.C.No.45 of 2022 on the file of the Special Judicial Magistrate of First Class (Prohibition & Excise) Court at Kurnool, and both the cases are pending for adjudication before the competent Courts at Kurnool and the petitioner is attending the case proceedings regularly. The petitioner/husband further pleaded that, the respondent/wife and her associates threatened him and his family members with dire consequences and abused them. Subsequently, the petitioner/husband filed a memo annexing the WhatsApp messages screenshots, before the Family Court-cum-IV Additional Judge, Kurnool, in F.C.M.C.No.56 of 2021, seeking protection for his family. III. The petitioner/husband further pleaded that, he is the sole care taker of his aged parents and suffered grave mental agony and financial hardship, due to false and frivolous cases filed by respondent/wife. He further pleaded that the father of the respondent/wife, is a Senior Advocate and State Vice-President of the BJP, along with his associates, has been consistently intimidating him with life threat, creating an atmosphere of fear that prevents him from defending himself, for the above mentioned cases filed by the respondent/wife and that the petitioner/husband is constrained to file the present petition seeking for withdrawal of F.C.O.P.No.143 of 2024 on the file of the Family Court-cum-IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kurnool and to transfer the same to any other competent Family Court at Vijayawada, Krishna District. 3. Heard learned counsel appearing on both sides on record. 4. Perused the material available on record. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner drew attention of this Court, in respect of a copy of WhatsApp messages sent by the respondent/wife to the petitioner/husband. It is the specific case of the petitioner that he filed same along with the Memo before the Family Court, Kurnool in F.C.M.C.No.56 of 2021, which is pending for adjudication. If the petitioner/husband herein is facing any threat in the hands of the respondent/wife or her father in attending the Court proceedings at Kurnool, the petitioner/husband herein is at liberty to inform in-writing to the concerned trial Court or concerned Police, they will act in accordance with procedure or law. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that, if the case has not transferred from the Judge, Family Court, Kurnool, the personal appearance of the petitioner/husband may be dispensed with. 7. It was brought to the notice of this Court by the learned counsel appearing on both sides that the aforesaid case is pending for enquiry and the enquiry is not yet commenced in F.C.O.P.No.143 of 2024, before Family Court-cum-IV Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kurnool. Learned counsel appearing on both sides submitted that, a time limit may be fixed to the Judge, Family Court, Kurnool, to dispose of the matter. 8. The Apex Court in a case of GEETA HEERA Vs HARISH CHANDER HEERA1, held by considering the fact that “if a wife does 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.” 9. The Apex Court in a case of N.C.V. AISHWARYA VS A.S. SARAVANA KARTHIK SHA2, held as follows: “9. The cardinal principles 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.” 10. On considering the facts and circumstances of the present case, I am of the considered view that in matrimonial proceedings, the convenience of the wife has to be taken into 1(2000) 10 SCC 304 2 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 627 consideration than that of the inconvenience of the petitioner/husband. On considering, the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for both sides and in view of the ratio laid down in the aforesaid case laws that in matrimonial cases, the request of the petitioner/husband for transfer cannot be considered. Moreover, mere apprehension of threat is not a valid ground for seeking transfer of the case from one place to another place. In view of the aforesaid reasons, I do not find any merit and subsistence in the contentions taken by the petitioner and as such the present Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is liable to be dismissed as devoid of merit. 11. On considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Judge, Family Court, Kurnool, is hereby directed not to insist the personal appearance of the petitioner in F.C.O.P.No.143 of 2024 on each and every adjournment, except on the days when his presence is required as per law. 12. In the result, the Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is dismissed and the personal appearance of the petitioner/husband in F.C.O.P.No.143 of 2024, on the file of the Judge, Family Court, Kurnool, has been dispensed with, except on the days when his presence is required as per law. 13. On considering the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing on both sides, the learned Judge, Family Court, Kurnool, is hereby instructed to dispose of the matter in F.C.O.P.No.143 of 2024, within a period of six (06) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 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. _______________________________ JUSTICE V. GOPALA KRISHNA RAO Date: 16.09.2025 CVD