APHC010408552025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3397] TUESDAY, THE EIGHTEENTH DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENUTHURUMALLI GOPALA KRISHNA RAO TRANS. CIVIL MISC.PETITION NO: 254/2025 Between: 1. KONDETI GEETHA MADHURI, W/O GADDAM SIVA PRASAD, AGED ABOUT 36 YEARS, OCC UNEMPLOYED, R/O FLAT NO.502, ASHOK AVENUE APARTMENT, ASHOK NAGAR, KURNOOL. ...PETITIONER AND 1. GADDAM SIVA PRASAD, S/o G Karunakar, Aged about 37 years, Occ Software employee, R/o D.No.3-50, Teachers Colony, Bangalore Road, Madanapalle, Currently residing, Keerthi Bhavam, 3rd crpss, Bachanna Layout, B Chanansadra, Banaswadi, Bangalore, Karnataka state. ...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 pleased to withdraw the H.M.O.P No. 106 of 2024 pending on the file of the Hon'ble Court of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Madanapalle, Chittoor District and to transfer the same to Hon'ble Family Court, Kurnool, Kurnool district or any other competent court in Kurnool, Kurnool, District 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 to stay all the further proceedings in H.M.O.PNo.106 of 2024 pending on the file of Hon’ble Court of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Madanapalle, Chittoor District pending disposal of the above TR.C.M.P Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. AYESHA AZMA S Counsel for the Respondent: 1. C SUBODH THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V. GOPALA KRISHNA RAO TRANSFER CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.254 of 2025 ORDER: The petitioner/wife 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 H.M.O.P.No.106 of 2024 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Madanapalle, Chittoor District, and transfer the same to the file of the Judge, Family Court, Kurnool, Kurnool District, for trail and disposal of the same. 2. The case of the petitioner in brief is as follows: I. The petitioner is the legally wedded wife of the respondent and their marriage was solemnized on 09.02.2014, in the presence of both side elders and well- wishers at Imperial Gardens, Sunkesula Road, Kurnool District, as per the Hindu Rites and Caste Customs. During their wedlock, the petitioner/wife and the respondent/husband were blessed with two (2) children. After that, due to the matrimonial disputes, the petitioner/wife along with her minor children aged about 10 & 8 years respectively are residing separately in her parents’ house at Kurnool. II. The petitioner/wife further pleaded that with a view to cause inconvenience and to harass her, the respondent/husband herein had filed a divorce petition vide H.M.O.P.No.106 of 2024 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Madanapalle, Chittoor District, under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, seeking for dissolution of the marriage and the same is pending for adjudication. III. Learned counsel for the petitioner would further contend that the petitioner, being a woman, has been residing separately along with her two (2) children and is depending upon the mercy of her parents at Kurnool. The distance between Kurnool and Madanapalle is more than 300Kms, and it is very difficult for her to travel to attend the divorce case proceedings filed by the respondent/husband before the Court at Madanapalle without any male assistance, and that she was constrained to file the present petition against the respondent/husband seeking withdrawal of H.M.O.P.No.106 of 2024 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Madanapalle, Chittoor District, and transfer of the same to the file of the Judge, Family Court, Kurnool, Kurnool District, for trial and disposal of the same. 3. Learned counsel for the respondent would contend that the respondent/husband herein is a software employee, currently working in Bangalore, and that if this Court is inclined to transfer the said case i.e., H.M.O.P.No.106 of 2024, from Madanapalle to Kurnool, the respondent/husband will face much difficulty in attending the Court proceedings before the Court at Kurnool. 4. Heard learned counsel appearing on both sides on record. 5. Perused the material available on record. 6. The material on record prima facie goes to show that, due to the matrimonial disputes between the spouses, the petitioner/wife along with her two (2) children are residing separately and depending upon the mercy of her parents at Kurnool. The respondent/husband had filed a divorce petition against the petitioner/wife herein vide H.M.O.P.No.106 of 2024 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Madanapalle, Chittoor District, under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, seeking for dissolution of the marriage and the same is pending for adjudication. 7. 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.” 8. 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 1(2000) 10 SCC 304 2 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 627 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.” 9. On considering the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for both sides and in view of the ratio laid down by the aforesaid case laws and on considering the facts and circumstances of the present case that in 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 request made by the petitioner/wife, seeking for withdrawal of H.M.O.P.No.106 of 2024 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Madanapalle, Chittoor District, and transfer the same to the file of the Judge, Family Court, Kurnool. Further, on considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respondent that the respondent/husband herein is a software employee and is currently residing in Bangalore, therefore, it is desirable to dispense with the personal appearance of the respondent/husband herein i.e., the petitioner in H.M.O.P.No.106 of 2024 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Madanapalle, Chittoor District, before the transferee Court, except on the days when his personal appearance is required before the said Court as per law. 10. In the result, the Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is allowed and the H.M.O.P.No.106 of 2024 on the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Madanapalle, Chittoor District, is hereby withdrawn and transferred to the file of the Judge, Family Court, Kurnool, Kurnool District. The learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Madanapalle, Chittoor District, shall transmit the case record in H.M.O.P.No.106 of 2024, to the file of the Judge, Family Court, Kurnool, Kurnool District, duly indexed as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of one (01) week from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. The transferee Court i.e., learned Judge, Family Court, Kurnool, Kurnool District, is hereby directed not to insist for the personal appearance of the respondent herein i.e., the petitioner in H.M.O.P.No.106 of 2024, as long as his counsel is attending the Court proceedings and representing the case except on the day when re-conciliation proceedings are being taken up or on the day when his cross-examination is required to be recorded or on any other day when his personal appearance is required as directed by the learned Judge, Family Court, Kurnool, Kurnool District. 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: 18.11.2025 CVD