THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V. GOPALA KRISHNA RAO TRANSFER CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.82 of 2026 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 to withdraw H.M.O.P.No.76 of 2025 on the file of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Kovvur, SPSR Nellore District and transfer the same to the file of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Kandukur, Prakasam District for trial and disposal. 2. The case of the petitioner in brief is as follows: i. The petitioner is the legally wedded wife of the respondent/husband, and their marriage was solemnized on 09.08.2024 as per Hindu Marriage customs and rituals at Buchireddypalem, Nellore. Thereafter, due to matrimonial disputes between the parties, the petitioner/wife has been residing separately at Chinnapavani Village, Lingasamudram Mandal near Kandukur, in her parents‟ house along with her kid aged about 1 year. ii. The petitioner pleaded that she filed H.M.O.P.No.137 of 2025 on the file of learned Senior Civil Judge, Kandukur, Prakasam District, seeking restitution of conjugal rights under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, and the same is pending adjudication. iii. The petitioner further pleaded that the respondent/husband, filed H.M.O.P.No.76 of 2025, on the file of learned Senior Civil Judge, Kovvur, SPSR Nellore District, seeking dissolution of marriage, under Section 13(1) (ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and the same is pending adjudication. The petitioner further pleaded that the distance between Kandukur and Kovvur is more than 300 kms and it is very difficult for the petitioner/wife to appear before the learned Senior Civil Judge, Kovvur, on each and every adjournment without any male assistance, and that she is constrained to file this petition. 3. Heard Sri Md. Saleem, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Siva Prasad Reddy Venati, learned counsel for the respondent. 4. The learned counsel for the respondent would contend that the respondent is working as a software engineer and currently residing at Hyderabad. 5. Perused the material available on record. 6. The material on record prima facie shows that, in view of the matrimonial disputes between the parties, the petitioner/wife has been residing separately at Chinnapavani Village, Lingasamudram Mandal near Kandukur, in her parents‟ house along with her kid aged about 1 year, depending upon the mercy of her parents‟. The material on record discloses that the respondent/husband, filed H.M.O.P.No.76 of 2025, on the file of learned Senior Civil Judge, Kovvur, SPSR Nellore District, seeking dissolution of marriage, under Section 13 (1) (ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and the same is pending adjudication. The material on record further discloses that the petitioner/wife filed H.M.O.P.No.137 of 2025 on the file of learned Senior Civil Judge, Kandukur, Prakasam District, seeking restitution of conjugal rights under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, and the same is pending 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 Sha2held 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. In the case at hand, the petitioner/wife is currently staying at Chinnapavani Village, Lingasamudram Mandal near Kandukur in Prakasam District along with her kid aged about one (01) year at her parents‟ house and she also instituted H.M.O.P.No.137 of 2025 on the file of learned Senior Civil 1(2000) 10 SCC 304 2 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 627 Judge, Kandukur, Prakasam District, seeking restitution of conjugal rights under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act. The material available on record also reveals that subsequent to filing of the said case, the husband filed H.M.O.P.No.76 of 2025, on the file of learned Senior Civil Judge, Kovvur, SPSR Nellore District, seeking dissolution of marriage. The law is well settled that, to avoid conflicting decisions, both cases i.e., the petition for restitution of conjugal rights, filed by the petitioner/ wife and the petition for seeking divorce, filed by the respondent/ husband have to be tried to the same Court. Furthermore, the petitioner/wife is currently staying with a kid aged about one (01) year in Prakasam District in her parents‟ house and the husband herein is also attending the case proceedings in H.M.O.P.No.137 of 2025 on the file of learned Senior Civil Judge, Kandukur, Prakasam District. For the aforesaid reasons 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 taken into consideration rather than the inconvenience caused to the husband. Moreover, the husband is also attending the case proceedings before the learned Senior Civil Judge at Kandukur in connection with H.M.O.P.No.137 of 2025. Therefore, I am of the considered view that there are justifiable grounds to consider the request made by the petitioner/wife to transfer H.M.O.P.No.76 of 2025, on the file of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Kovvur, SPSR Nellore District to the file of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Kandukur, Prakasam District. 10. In the result, the present Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is allowed, and H.M.O.P.No.76 of 2025, on the file of learned Senior Civil Judge, Kovvur, SPSR Nellore District is hereby withdrawn and transferred to the file of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Kandukur, Prakasam District. The learned Senior Civil Judge, Kovvur, SPSR. Nellore District, shall transmit the entire case record in H.M.O.P.No.76 of 2025, to the file of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Kandukur, Prakasam District, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of two (02) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Both the parties are hereby directed to appear before the learned Senior Civil Judge, Kandukur, Prakasam District, at 10:30 a.m. on 17.06.2026. 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: 29.04.2026 JLSR 31 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V. GOPALA KRISHNA RAO TRANSFER CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.82 of 2026 Date: 29.04.2026 JLSR