APHC010033842025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction) [3397] FRIDAY ,THE TWENTY EIGHTH DAY OF MARCH TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENUTHURUMALLI GOPALA KRISHNA RAO TRANS. CIVIL MISC.PETITION NO: 22/2025 Between: Shaik Masthan Bee @ Nazma ...PETITIONER AND Shaik Nagur Valli ...RESPONDENT Counsel for the Petitioner: 1. MANDALIKA KAVYA SUDHA Counsel for the Respondent: 1. KOPPARTHI SUMATHI The Court made the following: ORDER: The petitioner/wife filed the present petition under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, seeking to withdraw F.C.O.P.No.398 of 2024, on the file of the Family Court-Cum-VI Additional District Judge, Nellore, S.P.S.R. Nellore District and transfer the same to the IX Additional District Judge-Cum-Family Court, Rajamahendravaram, East Godavari District. 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 has been performed on 24.02.2008 as per Muslim rites and customs. During their wedlock, the petitioner and the respondent were blessed with two (02) children aged about 8 years and 7 years respectively. In view of the matrimonial disputes between both the parties, the petitioner/wife along with her children are staying at her parents’ house at Nidadavolu, East Godavari District. The petitioner pleaded that she had lodged a complaint before the Nidadavolu Police Station, under Sections 498-A, 323, 506(2) IPC and under Section 200 of Cr.P.C., against the respondent/husband and the same was registered as C.C.No.581 of 2021 and the same is pending. The petitioner further pleaded that she had also filed a Maintenance Case vide M.C.No.35 of 2021 and a Domestic Violence Case vide D.V.C.No.23 of 2023, on the file of the Additional Junior Civil Judge- Cum-Judicial First Class Magistrate, Nidadavolu and the respondent/husband is attending the court proceedings in the aforesaid cases before the competent courts at Nidadavolu. The petitioner contend that to cause inconvenience to her, the respondent/husband filed F.C.O.P.No.398 of 2024, on the file of the Family Court-Cum-VI Additional District Judge, Nellore, under the Muslim Personal Law Shariat Application Act, 1937, r/w Sections 7 & 8 of the Family Courts Act seeking for dissolution of marriage. II. Learned counsel for the petitioner further contended that the petitioner being a woman having two children aged about 8 years and 7 years respectively, depending upon her parents, it is very difficult for her to travel at a distance of more than 400Kms from Nidadavolu to Nellore without any male support and that she was constrained to file the present petition against the respondent/husband seeking to withdraw F.C.O.P.No.398 of 2024, on the file of the Family Court-Cum-VI Additional District Judge, Nellore, S.P.S.R. Nellore District and transfer the same to the IX Additional District Judge-Cum-Family Court, Rajamahendravaram, East Godavari District. 3. The respondent had filed a counter affidavit denying the allegations made by the petitioner/wife in her transfer petition. Learned counsel for the respondent/husband would contend that there are no grounds to consider the request of the petitioner/wife and she further contended that the respondent is a permanent employee at Electricity Department and is working at Udayagiri, Nellore District and requested to dismiss the transfer petition. 4. Heard Ms. Mandalika Kavya Sudha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Smt. Kopparthi Sumathi, learned counsel for the respondent. Perused the material available on record. 5. Learned counsel for the respondent/husband has placed reliance on the Order of the Composite High Court of Andhra Pradesh, at Hyderabad in Chejerla Srilakshmi Vs. Chejerla Ramesh Babu 1. 6. The material on record prima facie goes to show that the petitioner/wife had filed a 498-A IPC case against the respondent/husband vide C.C.No.581 of 2021, a Maintenance Case vide M.C.No.35 of 2021 and a Domestic Violence Case vide D.V.C.No.23 of 2023, on the file of the Additional Junior Civil Judge-Cum-Judicial First Class Magistrate, Nidadavolu, wherein the respondent/husband is attending the Court proceedings in the aforesaid cases. The respondent/husband has filed F.C.O.P.No.398 of 2024, on the file of the Family Court-Cum-VI Additional District Judge, Nellore, under the Muslim Personal Law Shariat Application Act, 1937, r/w Sections 7 & 8 of the Family Courts Act seeking for dissolution of marriage. 7. The Apex Court in a case of GEETA HEERA Vs HARISH CHANDER HEERA 2, 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.” 1 2018(4) ALD 162 2 (2000) 10 SCC 304 8. The Apex Court in a case of N.C.V. Aishwarya Vs A.S.Saravana Karthik Sha3 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.” 9. On considering the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the both sides 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 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 F.C.O.P.No.398 of 2024, on the file of the Family Court-Cum-VI Additional District Judge, Nellore, S.P.S.R. Nellore District and transfer the same to the IX Additional District Judge-Cum-Family Court, Rajamahendravaram, East Godavari District. Further, on considering the submission made by the learned counsel for the respondent that the respondent is a permanent employee at Electricity Department and is working at Udayagiri, Nellore District, therefore, this Court is of the opinion that it is 3 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 627 desirable to dispense with the personal attendance of the respondent/husband i.e., the petitioner in F.C.O.P.No.398 of 2024, before the transferee Court i.e., the IX Additional District Judge-Cum-Family Court, Rajamahendravaram, East Godavari District. 10. In the result, the present petition is allowed and F.C.O.P.No.398 of 2024, on the file of the Family Court-Cum-VI Additional District Judge, Nellore, S.P.S.R. Nellore District, is hereby withdrawn and transferred to the IX Additional District Judge-Cum-Family Court, Rajamahendravaram, East Godavari District. The Family Court-Cum-VI Additional District Judge, Nellore, S.P.S.R. Nellore District, shall transmit the case record in F.C.O.P.No.398 of 2024 to the IX Additional District Judge-Cum-Family Court, Rajamahendravaram, East Godavari District 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. Further the personal attendance of the respondent/husband i.e., the petitioner in F.C.O.P.No.398 of 2024, is hereby dispensed with before the transferee Court i.e., the IX Additional District Judge-Cum-Family Court, Rajamahendravaram, East Godavari District and further, after receipt of the case record in F.C.O.P.No.398 of 2024, from the Family Court-Cum-VI Additional District Judge, Nellore, S.P.S.R. Nellore District, the learned Judge, Family Court, Rajamahendravaram is directed not to insist for the personal appearance of the respondent herein i.e., the petitioner in F.C.O.P.No.398 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 Family Court, Rajamahendravaram. Both parties are directed to appear before the IX Additional District Judge- Cum-Family Court, Rajamahendravaram, East Godavari District on 05.05.2025 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. _______________________________ JUSTICE V.GOPALA KRISHNA RAO Date: 28.03.2025 SRT