THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V. GOPALA KRISHNA RAO TRANSFER CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.386 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 F.C.O.P.No.910 of 2025, on the file of the IV Additional District and Sessions Judge-cum-Family Court, Vijayawada, Krishna District and transfer the same to the file of the any Civil Judge (Senior Division), Tenali, Guntur District, for trial 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/husband, and their marriage was solemnized on 10.02.2023 at Sri Lakshmi Ganapathi Kalyanamandapam, Vemuru, 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 Vemuru Village, Bapatla District. The petitioner/wife further pleaded that, in view of the harassment caused by the respondent/husband, she lodged a complaint dated 18.11.2024 against the respondent/husband herein, 2 VGKR, J Tr.C.M.P.No.386 of 2025 which was registered as F.I.R.No.146 of 2024, for the offences punishable under Section 85 B.N.S. Act, 2023 and Sections 3 & 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, before the Vemuru Police Station, the same is pending for investigation. II. The petitioner/wife further pleaded that, with a view to cause inconvenience to her, the respondent/husband filed a divorce petition vide F.C.O.P.No.910 of 2025, on the file of the IV Additional District and Sessions Judge- cum-Family Court, Vijayawada, Krishna District, under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, for dissolution of marriage, the same is pending for adjudication. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that the petitioner herein being a woman, has been residing at her parents‟ house and depending upon the mercy of her parents at Vemuru Village, Bapatla District and it is very difficult for her to travel to attend the divorce case proceedings filed by the respondent/husband before the Court at Vijayawada without any male assistance, and that she was constrained to file the present petition against the respondent/husband, seeking for withdrawal of F.C.O.P.No.910 of 2025, on the file of the IV Additional 3 VGKR, J Tr.C.M.P.No.386 of 2025 District and Sessions Judge-cum-Family Court, Vijayawada, Krishna District and transfer the same to the file of the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Tenali, Guntur District, for trial and disposal of the same. 4. Learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the petitioner herein is a private employee and is currently residing at Alpha Ladies P.G. Hostel, High School Road, Patamata, Vijayawada. However, in order to substantiate the same, no documentary evidence was produced by the respondent, except making a bald allegation. He further submitted that the respondent/husband herein is working as a Software Engineer at Bangalore and is presently residing at Vijayawada, attending his duties by way of work from home. 5. Heard Mr. M. Ratan Mohan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Banka Nageswara Roa, learned counsel for the respondent. 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 Vemuru Village, Bapatla District and she lodged a compliant against the respondent/husband herein, which was registered as F.I.R.No.146 of 2024, for the offences punishable under Section 85 B.N.S. Act, 2023 and Sections 3 & 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 4 VGKR, J Tr.C.M.P.No.386 of 2025 1961, before the Vemuru Police Station, the same is pending for investigation. The material on record further discloses that the respondent/husband herein had filed a divorce petition against the petitioner/wife herein vide F.C.O.P.No.910 of 2025, on the file of the IV Additional District and Sessions Judge-cum-Family Court, Vijayawada, Krishna District, under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, for dissolution of marriage, the same is 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 1(2000) 10 SCC 304 2 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 627 5 VGKR, J Tr.C.M.P.No.386 of 2025 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 case, I am of the considered view that in matrimonial proceedings, the convenience of the wife has to be taken into consideration than that of the inconvenience of the husband. Therefore, there are justifiable grounds to consider the request made by the petitioner/wife, seeking for withdrawal of F.C.O.P.No.910 of 2025 on the file of the IV Additional District and Sessions Judge-cum-Family Court, Vijayawada, Krishna District and transfer the same to the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Tenali, Guntur District. Further, on considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respondent that the respondent herein is a Software Engineer at Bangalore and therefore, the personal appearance of the respondent/husband herein i.e., the petitioner in F.C.O.P.No.910 of 2025, on the file of the IV Additional District and Sessions Judge-cum- Family Court, Vijayawada, Krishna District, has been dispensed with before the transferee Court, except on the days when his personal appearance is required before the said Court as per law. 6 VGKR, J Tr.C.M.P.No.386 of 2025 11. In the result, the Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is allowed and the F.C.O.P.No.910 of 2025, on the file of the IV Additional District and Sessions Judge-cum-Family Court, Vijayawada, Krishna District, is hereby withdrawn and transferred to the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Tenali, Guntur District. The learned IV Additional District and Sessions Judge-cum-Family Court, Vijayawada, Krishna District, shall transmit the entire case record in F.C.O.P.No.910 of 2025, to the file of the Principal Senior Civil Judge, Tenali, Guntur District, duly indexed as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of five (05) days from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. Both the parties are directed to appear before the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Tenali, Guntur District on 27.02.2026 at 10.30 A.M. The transferee Court i.e., learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Tenali, Guntur District, is hereby directed not to insist for the personal appearance of the respondent herein i.e., the petitioner in F.C.O.P.No.910 of 2025, 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 Principal Senior Civil Judge, Tenali, Guntur District. There shall be no order as to costs. 7 VGKR, J Tr.C.M.P.No.386 of 2025 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: 29.01.2026 NOTE: Issue C.C. By 30.01.2026 B/o CVD