Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Andhra Pradesh · body

2025 DAILYLAW 50396 (AP)

SMT INTI SANTHOSHA SOWBHAGYAMMA v. INTI GANGADHARA RAO @ JOHN WESLY

TRCMP/339/2024 · 2025-05-04

Venuthurumalli Gopala Krishna Rao

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI MONDAY, THE FIFTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE V. GOPALA KRISHNA RAO TRANSFER CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.339 of 2024 IN Between: Smt Inti Santhosha Sowbhagyamma, W/o. Inti.Gangadhara Rao, 49- 50A, 22)^^ Ward, Sri ram Nagar, B Camp, Kurnool, Kurnool District Andhra Pradesh-518001. ..Petitioner/Respondent AND Inti Gangadhara Rao @ John Wesly, S/o. Veera Raju, R/o. Harijanawada(SC Colony), Pedapalaparru Village, Mudinepalli Mandal Kaikaluru JCJC Limits.CellNo-9550976274. ...Respondent/Petitioner Petition under Section 24 of the C.P.C. is filed Praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith, the High Court may be vide DOP.No.115 of 2023 on the file of pleased to transfer the Divorce case ble XI Additional District Judge, Gudivada, Krishna District (which was Hon transferred from Principal District Judge, Machilipatnam) to Family Court at Kurnool of Kurnool District, A.P. state. 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 in Divorce case vide DOP.No. 115/2023 on the file of the Hon’ble XI Additional District Judge, Gudivada, Krishna District, A.P. Counsel for the Petitioner : Sri Harsha Vardhana Rao C Counsel for the Respondent : Sri Gandrala Rathna Kumar The Court made the following: 1 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V. GOPALA KRISHNA RAO TRANSFER CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.339 of 2024 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 transfer of D.O.P.No.115 of 2023 on the file of the XI Additional District Judge, Gudivada, Krishna District, to the Judge, Family Court, Kurnool, for trial. 2. The case of the petitioner in brief is as follows: I. The petitioner is the legally wedded wife of the respondent and the marriage of the petitioner with the respondent was solemnized on 09.12.2011, at C.S.I. Church, Pedapalaparru Village, Mudinepalli Mandal, per Christina Rites and Caste Customs. After that, due to the matrimonial disputes between both the spouses, the petitioner/wife has been residing separately by doing a private job at Kurnool. The petitioner/wife pleaded that she filed Domestic Violence Case vide D.V.C.No.75 of 2021, on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Kurnool and the said case was disposed of. At present, the Execution Petition was filed and the same is also pending for adjudication against the respondent/husband herein. The petitioner/wife further pleaded that to cause unnecessary inconvenience to her, the respondent/husband had filed D.O.P.No.115 of 2023 on the file of the XI Additional District Judge, Gudivada, Krishna District, under Section 10(1)(x) of the Indian Divorce Act, 1869, seeking for divorce and the same is perjiding for adjudication. as VGKR, J Tr.C.M.P.No.339 of 2024 Dated 05.05.2025 2 II. The petitioner/wife further pleaded that, she being a woman, residing separately by doing a private job at Kurnool, it is very difficult for her to travel at a distance of more than 400Kms from Kurnool to Gudivada to attend the divorce case proceedings on each and every adjournment without any male support and that she is constrained to file the present petition seeking transfer of D.O.P.No.115 of 2023 on the file of the XI Additional District Judge, Gudivada, Krishna District, to the Judge, Family Court, Kurnool. The respondent filed his counter-affidavit by denying the averments of the 3. petitioner filed in the petition. Learned counsel for the respondent would contend that there are no grounds to allow the present petition filed by the petitioner/wife and the present Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition may be dismissed. 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 both the spouses, the petitioner/wife has been residing separately by doing a private job at Kurnool and she filed a Domestic Violence Case vide D.V.C.No.70 of 2021 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Kurnool, the said case was disposed of before the Court below and at present, the Execution Petition also filed to enforce the order passed in Domestic Violence Case and that case is yet to be numbered by the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Kurnool. It is also a fact that, the respondent/husband has instituted D.O.P.No.115 of 2023 on the file of the XI Additional District Judge, 7. a case i.e. VGKR, J Tr.C.M.P.No.339 of 2024 Dated 05.05.2025 4^^ 3 Gudivada, Krishna District, under Section 10(1)(x) of the Indian Divorce Act, 1869, seeking for divorce and the same is pending for adjudication. The Apex Court in a case of GEETA HEERA Vs HARISH CHANDER 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.” 8. The Apex Court in a case of N.C.V. AISHWARYA VS A S. SARAVANA KARTHIK SHA^, held as follows: 9. “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 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 appearing for both sides and in view of the ratio laid down by the aforesaid case laws and considering the facts and circumstances of the present casethat in matrimonial proceedings, the convenience of the wife has to be taken into 10. on H2000) 10 see 304 ^ 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 627 VGKR, J Tr.C.M.P.No.339 of 2024 Dated 05,05.2025 4 consideration than that of the i the considered view that there nconvenience of the husband. Therefore, I am of are justifiable grounds to consider the request made by the petitioner/wife, seeking transfer of D.O.P.No.115 of 2023 on the file of the XI Additional District Judge, Gudivada, Krishna District, to the Judge Family Court, Kurnool. 11. In the result, the Transfer Civil Miscellaneous D.O.P.No.115 of 2023 Petition is allowed and on the file of the XI Additional District Judge, Gudivada Krishna District, is hereby withdrawn and transferred to the Judge, Family Court, Kurnool. The learned XI Additional District Judge, Gudivada, Krishna District. Shall transmit the case record i “ “ Court, Kurnool, duly indexed period of two (02) weeks from the date of in D.O.P.No.115 of 2023, to the Judge, Family as expeditiously as possible preferably within a receipt of a copy of the order. Both the appear before the Judge, Family Court, Kurnool, as to costs. parties are directed to 16.06.2025, at 10.30 a.m. There shall be no order on As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if granted earlier, if any, shall stand closed. any pending and the Interim order Sd/- K J RAJA BABU ASSISTANT REGISTRAR //TRUE COPY// SECTION OFFICER To 1. The XI Additional District Judge, Gudivada, 2. The Judge, Family Court, Kurnool, Kurnool District 3. One CC to Sri Harsha Vardhana Rao Krishna District. C, Advocate [OPUC] 4. One CC to Sri Gandrala Rathna Kumar, Advocate [OPUC] 50A 23^?wir^^5^- S°'^bhagyamma, W/o. Inti.Gangadhara Rao 49- indh?a"pr^de1h-tU00T """" ® Disf^ct"" 6. Inti Gangadhara Rao @ John Wesly S/o Veera Rain rm 7. Three CD Copies TK AL HIGH COURT DATED:05/05/2025 ORDER TRCMP.No.339 of 2024 X 18 MAY 2025 ^ . Curreni Secuon ^ N£^£SPATC^ ALLOWING THE TRANSFER CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION