IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI THURSDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENUTHURUMALLI GOPALA KRISHNA RAO IRANS. CIVIL MISC.PETITION NO: 334 OF 2024 Between: Dompaka @ Kollapati Sundara Kranthi, W/o. Dompaka Chandrakanth Naidu, aged 35 years, R/o. D.No.8-145, Gopalaswamy Asharamam, Vadapalli, Kovvur Mandal, East Godavari District. ...Petitioner AND Dompaka Chandrakanth Naidu, S/o. Jaggu Naidu, aged 37 years, R/o. Uriam, Narasannapeta, Srikakulam District. ...Respondent Petition Under Section 24 of the C.P.C. Praying circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased to withdraw H.M.O.P. No.141 of 2024, before the Court of the III Additional Senior Civil Judge, Kakinada, and transfer the of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Kovvur. that in the same to the Court 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 stay all further proceedings H.M.O.P. No.141 of 2024, pending before the Court of the III Additional Senior Civil Judge, Kakinada. y'- * Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI. PARIMI RAMA RAYUDU Counsel for the Respondent: SRI ANGADA SATYA RAGHAVENDRA (Not Present) The Court made the following ORDER: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.GOPALA KRISHNA RAO TRANSFER CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.334 of 2024 ORDER: When the matter was listed on 19.02.2025, learned counsel for the petitioner was present, but, none appeared for the respondent. As such, the matter was posted to today, under the caption “For Orders”. Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, none appeared for the respondent. Learned counsel for the petitioner is present. 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.141 of 2024 on the file of the III Additional Senior Civil Judge, Kakinada and transfer the same to the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Kovvur. 3. The case of the petitioner in brief is as follows: I. The petitioner is the legally wedded wife of the respondent and their marriage has been performed at Samarlakota on 07.06.2015 as per Hindu rites and customs. During their wedlock, the petitioner and the respondent were blessed with a male child aged about 6 years. In view of the matrimonial disputes between both the parties, the petitioner/wife along with her son is staying at Gopalaswamy Asharamam, Vadapalli Kovvur Mandal, East Godavari District. The petitioner pleaded that she •s^ 2 Case vide M.C.No.59 of 2023 and a Domestic vide D.V.C.No.16 of 2024, on the file of the II Additional had filed a Maintenance Violence case Junior Civil Judge-Cum-Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Kovvur. The that she had also filed H.M.O.P.No.239 of petitioner further pleaded 2023, on the file of the section 13(1)(ia) of the marriage, in which the respondent/husband is proceedings and the same contend that to cause inconvenience has filed H.M.O.P.No.141 of 2024, on Civil Judge, Kakinada, under Section Principal Senior Civil Judge Court, Kovvur, under Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 seeking dissolution of attending the Court is pending for adjudication. The petitioner to her, the respondent/husband the file of the 111 Additional Senior 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 seeking for restitution of conjugal rights, counsel for the petitioner further contended that the petitioner aged about 6 years, depending upon her difficult for her to travel at a distance of more than Godavari District to Kakinada constrained to file the 11. Learned being a woman having a son parents, it is very from Kovvuru Mandal, East 75Kms without any male support and that she was present petition against the H.M.O.P.No.141 of 2024, on the Kakinada and transfer the same respondent/husband seeking to withdraw file of the 111 Additional Senior Civil to the Principal Senior Civil Judge Judge, Kovvur. 4. Heard Sri Parimi Rama Rayudu, learned counsel for the petitioner and Perused the material available on record. none appeared for the respondent 3 The material on record prima facie goes to show that the petitioner/wife 5. had instituted three (03) cases i.e., Maintenance Case, Domestic Violence Case and Divorce Case against the respondent/husband, the same are pending before the competent Courts at Kovvuru and the respondent/husband is also attending the Court proceedings in the aforesaid cases. On the other hand the respondent/husband had instituted H.M.O.P.No.141 of 2024, on the file of the III Additional Senior Civil Judge, Kakinada, seeking restitution of conjugal rights. The Apex Court in a case of N.C.V. Aishwarya Vs A.S.Saravana 6. 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 7. than that of the inconvenience of the husband. Therefore, this Court is of the ^ 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 627 , 4 considered view that there are grounds to consider the request of the petitioner/wife to withdraw H.M.O.P.No.141 of 2024, on the file of the III Additional Senior Civil Judge, Kakinada and transfer the same to the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Kovvur. In the result, the present petition is allowed and H.M.O.P.No.141 of 2024, on the file of the III Additional Senior Civil Judge, Kakinada, is hereby withdrawn and transferred to the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Kovvur. The III Additional Senior Civil Judge, Kakinada, shall transmit the case record in H.M.O.P.No.141 of 2024 to the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Kovvur 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. There shall be no order as to costs. 8. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending and the Interim order granted earlier, if any, shall stand closed. Sd/-B PRASADA RAO ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To 1. The Principal District & Sessions Judge, Rajahmundry. 2. The Principal District & Sessions Judge, Kovvur, West Godavari District. 3. The III Additional Senior Civil Judge, Kakinada. 4. The Principal Senior Civil Judge, Kovvur. 5. One CC to Sri Parimi Rama Rayudu, Advocate [OPUC] 6. One CC to Sri Angada Satya Raghavendra, Advocate [OPUC] 7. Three CD Copies East Godavari at Chp sree HIGH COURT DATED:20/02/2025 ORDER TRCIVIP.No.334 of 2024 X 0 <1 MAK 2?2j ^ . Current section <«/ ALLOWING THE TR.CMP. WITHOUT COSTS