IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH :: AMARAVATI TUESDAY ,THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V. GOPALA KRISHNA RAO TRANS. CIVIL MISC.PETITION NO: 358 OF 2024 Between: M S Haseen Taj, W/o Marripadu Shaik M. Imthiyaz, Aged about 37 years, Occ Dental Doctor, R/o. Door No. 106, L.S Nagar, Tirupati, Tirupati District. ...Petitioner AND Marripadu Shaik M Imthiyaz, S/o Late M.S Mahamood Basha Aged about 40 years, Occ Physio Therapy Doctor, R/o. Door No. 1-613, R.S Road Kadiri Town, Kadiri, Satyasai 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 to withdraw G.W.O.P, No.26 of 2024 on the file of Principal District Judge, Ananthapuram and transfer the same to the Family Court V Additional District Judge, Tirupati. f VC 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 of all further proceedings in G.W.OP No.26 of 2024 on the " file of Principal District Judge, Ananthapuram including appearance of the Petitioner in the above said case Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri. Dhanunjaya Baru Counsel for the Respondent: Sri R Sujan Kumar The Court made the following: 11^ THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.GOPALA KRISHNA RAO TRANSFER CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.358 of 2024 ORDER: The petitioner/wife filed the present petition under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, seeking to withdraw G.W.O.P.No.26 of 2024 on the file of the Principal District Judge, Ananthapuram and transfer the same to the Family Court-cum-V Additional District Judge, Tirupati. 2. The case of the petitioner in brief is as follows; The petitioner is the legally wedded wife of the respondent and in view of the matrimonial disputes between both the parties, the petitioner/wife is staying separately at Tirupati along with the child and working as a dentist in private hospital. The petitioner pleaded that she filed C.C.No.62 of 2019 on the file of the IV Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Tirupati and D.V.C.No.80 of 2023 on the file of the III Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, at Tirupati, against the respondent/husband and his family members and the respondent/husband is also attending the said two (02) cases. She further pleaded that the child is suffering from defect of Ventricular Septal i.e. hole in heart. II. The petitioner further pleaded that, to cause inconvenience to her, the respondent/husband filed G.W.O.P.No.26 of 2024 on the file of the "Principal District Judge, Ananthapuram, seeking custody of wards I. f •> 2 against the petitioner/wife herein. The petitioner/wife further pleaded the distance between the Tirupati and Ananthapuram is difficult for her to travel from Tirupati that as approximately 275 Kms, it is very to Ananthauram along with child who is suffering from health ailments constrained to file the present petition against the and that she was respondent/husband seeking to withdraw G.W.O.P.No.26 of 2024 on file of the Principal District Judge, Ananthapuram and transfer the the same to the Family Court-cum-V Additional District Judge, Tirupati 3. Heard both sides. Perused the material available on record. 4. counsel for the respondent would contend that, instead of be transferred to 5. Learned transferring the matter to Tirupati, the matter may convenient to both the parties. It is not the case of Madanapalle, which is very the either of the parties that either petitioner or respondent are staying at Madanapalle. Learned counsel for the respondent would further contend that Doctor at Kadiri, if the Family the file of the Principal District Judge, Ananthapuram the respondent/husband has been working as a Court proceedings in on has been transferred to Family Court-cum-V Additional District Judge, Tirupati it is very difficult to the respondent/husband herein to attend the Court proceedings at Tirupati, as the respondent/husband is working at Kadiri. 3 6. The material available on record, prima facie goes to show that the petitioner/wife has instituted two (02) cases i.e., D.V.C.No.80 of 2023 and C.C.No.62 of 2019 before the competent Courts at Tirupati against the respondent/husband and he is also attending the said two (02) cases. The material on record further reveals that the respondent/husband filed G.W.O.P.No.26 of 2024 on the file of the Principal District Judge Ananthapuram, seeking custody of wards against the petitioner/wife herein. The petitioner/wife further pleaded that as the distance between the Ananthapuram and Tirupati is approximately 275 Kms, it is very difficult for her to travel from Tirupati to Ananthauram and that she was constrained to file the present petition. 7. 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 ^ 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 627 4 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 appearing for both sides and in view of the ratio laid down in the aforesaid case laws 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 G.W.O.P.No.26 of 2024 on the file of the Principal District Judge, Ananthapuram and transfer the same to the Family Court-cum-V Additional District Judge, Tirupati. Further, the personal attendance of the respondent herein i.e. the petitioner in G.W.O.P.No.26 of 2024 on the file of the Principal District Judge, Ananthapuram, has been dispensed with before the transferee Court i.e.. Family Court-cum-V Additional District Judge, Tirupati, except on the days when his presence is required as per law. 8. In the result, the Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is allowed and G.W.C.P.No.26 of 2024 on the file of the Principal District Judge, Ananthapuram, is hereby withdrawn and transferred to the Family Court-cum- Additional District Judge, Tirupati. The Principal District Judge, Ananthapuram, shall transmit the case record in G.W.C.P.No.26 of 2024 to the Family Court-cum-V Additional District Judge, Tirupati, duly indexed as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of two (02) weeks from the 9. V 5 date of receipt of a copy of the order. Further, the personal attendance of the respondent herein i.e. the petitioner in G.W.O.P.No.26 of 2024 on the file of the Principal District Judge, Ananthapuram, has been dispensed with before the transferee Court i.e.. Family Court-cum-V Additional District Judge, Tirupati, except on the days when his presence is required as per law. Both the parties are directed to appear before the Family Court-cum-V Additional District Judge, Tirupati, on 13.03.2025, at 10.30 a.m. 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. Sd/- K SRINIVASA RAJU ASSISTANT REGISTRAR / //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To 1. The Principal District Judge, Ananthapuram, Ananthapuram District 2. The Family Court V Additional District Judge, Tirupati, Chittoor District 3. M S Haseen Taj, W/o Marripadu Shaik M. Imthiyaz, Aged about 37 years, Occ Dental Doctor, R/o. Door No. 106, L.S Nagar, Tirupati, Tirupati District. 4. Marripadu Shaik M Imthiyaz, S/o Late M.S Mahamood Basha Aged about 40 years, Occ Physio Therapy Doctor, R/o. Door No. 1-613, R.S Road Kadiri Town, Kadiri, Satyasai District. 5. One CC to Sri. Dhanunjaya Baru Advocate [OPUC] 6. One CC to Sri. R Sujan Kumar Advocate [OPUC] 7. Three CD Copies Stu HIGH COURT DATED; 28/01/2025 ORDER TRCMP.No.358 of 2024 g t 1 FEB 2025 ^ Curreiii oeciiun ALLOWING THE TR.CMP