THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V. GOPALA KRISHNA RAO TRANSFER CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.352 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 withdrawal of H.M.O.P.No.273 of 2025, on the file of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Narasaraopet, and to transfer the same to the Court of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Tenali, 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 21.04.2024 at Pavuluri Krishna Chowdary Coventional Hall, Tenali Town, Guntur District, as per Hindu rites and caste customs. Thereafter, due to matrimonial disputes between the parties, the petitioner/wife has been residing separately in her parents? house at Tenali Town. ii. The petitioner/wife further pleaded that, with a view to cause inconvenience to her, the respondent/husband filed a divorce petition vide H.M.O.P.No.273 of 2025, on the file of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Narasaraopet, under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, for dissolution of marriage, and the same is also pending for adjudication. 2 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would further contend that the petitioner, being a woman, has been residing at her parents? house and depending upon the mercy of her parents at Tenali Town, Guntur District and it is very difficult for her to travel to attend the case proceedings filed by the respondent/husband before the Court at Narasaraopet 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.273 of 2025, on the file of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Narasaraopet, and transfer the same to the file of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Tenali, Guntur District, for trial and disposal of the same. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent would contend that the respondent herein is working as a Software Engineer at Bangalore and that there are no merits in the transfer petition filed by the petitioner, and the petition may be dismissed. He would further contend that in case, if this Court transfers the said H.M.O.P.No.273 of 2025 to Tenali, it would be very difficult for the respondent/husband herein to appear before the learned Senior Civil Judge, Tenali. 5. Heard learned counsel appearing on both sides. 6. Perused the material available on record. 7. The material on record prima facie goes to show that, due to the matrimonial disputes between both parties, the petitioner/wife has been residing with her parents in Tenali. The material on record further reveals that the respondent/husband has instituted a petition against the 3 petitioner/wife herein vide H.M.O.P.No.273 of 2025, on the file of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Tenali, seeking dissolution of marriage, and the same is also pending for adjudication. 8. 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.= 9. The Apex Court in a case of N.C.V. Aishwarya Vs A.S.Saravana Karthik Sha2 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.” 10. On considering the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for both sides and in view of the ratio laid down in the aforesaid case laws and on considering the facts and circumstances of the present 1(2000) 10 SCC 304 2 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 627 4 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 transfer of H.M.O.P.No.273 of 2025, on the file of learned Senior Civil Judge, Narasaraopet, to the file of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Tenali. Further, on considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respondent that the respondent/husband herein is a Software Engineer who is currently working at 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.273 of 2025, on the file of learned Senior Civil Judge, Narasaropet, before the transferee Court, except on the days when his personal appearance is required before the said Court as per law. 11. In the result, the Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is allowed and the H.M.O.P.No.273 of 2025, on the file of learned Senior Civil Judge, Narasaraopet, is hereby withdrawn and transferred to the file of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Tenali, Guntur District. The learned Senior Civil Judge, Narasaraopet, shall transmit the case record in H.M.O.P.No.273 of 2025, to the file of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Tenali, Guntur 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. Both the parties are directed to appear before the learned Senior Civil Judge, Tenali on 23.02.2026 at 10.30 A.M. The transferee Court i.e., learned Senior Civil 5 Judge, Tenali, is hereby directed not to insist for the personal appearance of the respondent herein i.e., the petitioner in H.M.O.P.No.273 of 2025, as long as his counsel on record 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 Senior Civil Judge, Tenali, Guntur District. 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: 28.01.2026 MH 6 7 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V. GOPALA KRISHNA RAO 19 TRANSFER CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.352 of 2025 Date: 28.01.2026 MH