'. IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI WEDNESDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE VENUTHURUMALLI GOPALA KRISHNA RAO TRANS. CIVIL MISC.PETITION NO: 416 OF 2024 Between: Smt Kommoju Naga Gayatri, W/o. Kommoju Kondala Rao, Aged about 33 years, R/o.36-3-24/1, Kambalapeta, Rajamahendravaram, East Godavari District Andhra Pradesh.Mob 8639865734 ...Petitioner/Wife AND Sri Kommoju Kondala Rao, S/o. Late Chittibabu, aged 40 years, working as Home Gaurd D.No.4-111, Goughlachanna Nagar, Edulapaka Colony, Paravada Mandalam, Ankapalli-531021. ...Respondent/Husband 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 H.M.O.P.No.06 of 2024 on the file of the Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ankapalli at transfer the same to Principal Family Judge Court at Rajahmundry. r 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 grant stay of all further proceedings including appearance of petitioner in H.M.O.P.No.06 of 2024 in the court of the Additional Senior Civil Judge at Ankapalli. Counsel for the Petitioner: SRI MANIKANTESWARA RAO KOTHA Counsel for the Respondent: -- The Court made the following ORDER: % THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V.GOPALA KRISHNA RAO TRANSFER CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.416 of 2024 ORDER: Today when the matter is taken up for hearing, Sri Kotha Manikanteswar Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner has represented that the proof of service memo along with the postal track consignment sheet is filed before the Registry and the same is placed on the record. As per the said postal track consignment sheet, the registered notice sent to the respondent by the learned counsel for the petitioner was served on him. But, none appeared for the respondent. Therefore, service held sufficient. The petitioner/wife filed the present petition under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, seeking to withdraw H.M.O.P.No.06 of 2024, on the file of the Additional Senior Civil Judge, Anakapalli and transfer the same to the Principal Family Court Judge, Rajahmundry or to any other competent Court at Rajahmundry. 2. The case of the petitioner in brief is as follows; 3. The petitioner is the legally wedded wife of the respondent and their marriage has been performed at Annnavaram Devastanam, East Godavari District on 04.12.2011 as per Hindu rites and customs. During their wedlock, the petitioner and the respondent were blessed with two daughters. In view of the matrimonial disputes between both the parties, the petitioner/wife along with her daughters is staying at her parents’ I. 2 , East Godavari District. The petitioner complaint before the Disha Urban Police Section 498-A. 506 r/w 34 IPC of the Dowry Prohibition Act and the same of 2023 against the respondent/husband house at Rajamahendravaram pleaded that she had lodged a East Godavari District, under Station and under Sections 3 & 4 registered as Cr.No.126 and his family members, which is pending for investigation. The Maintenance Case vide was further pleaded that she had filed a petitioner F.C.O.P.No.336 of 2024, on the file of the Judge Family Court and F.C.O.P.No.255 of 2024, on Rajahmundry, under Section 9 of restitution of conjugal rights and the same Rajahmundry, seeking maintenance the file of the Judge Family Court Hindu Marriage Act, seeking pending for adjudication. The petitioner contend that to cause inconvenience to her, the respondent/husband has fiied H.M.O.P.No.06 are Additional Senior Civil Judge, Anakapalli of 2024, on the file of the under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 seeking for dissolution of marriage. Learned counsel for the petitioner further contended that the petrtioner two daughters, depending upon her parents, it is distance of more than 166 Kms from being a woman having very difficult for her to travel at a male support and that she was present petition against the respondent/husband the file of the Additional Rajahmundry to Anakapalli without any constrained to file the seeking to withdraw H.M.O.P.No.06 of 2024, on 3 Senior Civil Judge, Anakapalli and transfer the same to the Principal Family Court Judge, Rajahmundry or to any other competent Court at Rajahmundry. Heard Sri Kotha Manikanteswar Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner. 4. None appeared for the respondent. Perused the material available on record. The Apex Court in a case of GEETA HEERA Vs HARISH CHANGER 5. HEERA \ 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. 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. ” ^ (2000) 10 see 304 ^ 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 627 S’ 4 On considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner 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 H.M.O.P.No.06 of 2024, on the file of the Additional Senior Civil Judge, Anakapalli and transfer the same to the Principal Family Court Judge, Rajahmundry. 7. In the result, the present petition is allowed H.M.O.P.No.06 of 2024 the file of the Additional Senior Civil Judge, Anakapalli, is hereby withdrawn and transferred to the Family Court, Rajahmundry. The Additional Senior Civil Judge, Anakapalli, shall transmit the case record in FI.M.O.P.No.06 of 2024 to the Family Court, Rajahmundry 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. on As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending and the Interim order granted earlier, if any, shall stand closed. . Sd/- M PRABHAKAR RAO ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To 1. The Additional Senior Civil Judge, Ankapalli. 2. The Judge, Principal Family Court at Rajahmundry. 3. One CC to Sri Manikanteswara Rao Kotha, Advocate [OPUC] 4. Three CD Copies Chp sree * HIGH COURT DATED:05/02/2025 ORDER TRCMP.No.416 of 2024 Zr ANO(5^ o 2 8 FEB 2C25 . Current Section ALLOWING THE TR.C.M.P. WITHOUT COSTS