THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V. GOPALA KRISHNA RAO TRANSFER CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.138 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.85 of 2025 on the file of the learned Civil Judge, (Senior Division), Narsipatnam to the file of the learned IX Additional District Court- cum-Judge, Family Court at Rajamahendravaram, 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 23.12.2020 as per Hindu rites and traditions at Chikkudupalem Village in Nathavaram Mandal, Anakapalli District. Out of their wedlock, they were blessed with a male child. Thereafter, due to matrimonial disputes between the parties, the petitioner/wife has been residing separately along with the minor child at her parents’ house in Rajahmundry. ii. The petitioner further pleaded that the respondent/husband, to cause inconvenience to the petitioner, filed H.M.O.P.No.85 of 2025 on the file of the learned Civil Judge, (Senior Division), Narsipatnam, under Section 13(1) (ia)(ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, seeking dissolution of marriage and the same is pending adjudication. The petitioner 2 (VGKR,J TR.C.M.P.NO.138 OF 2026) further pleaded that the distance between Narsipatnam and Rajahmundry more than 150 kms., and it is very difficult for the petitioner/wife to appear before the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Narsipatnam, on each and every adjournment without any male assistance, and that she is constrained to file this petition. 3. Heard Sri B.Sudakar Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner. 4. As per the Memo of Proof of Service filed along with the postal tracking consignment details, the notice sent to the respondent was duly served on 07.05.2026. 5. Today, there is no representation for the respondent. 6. Perused the material available on record. 7. 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 Rajahmundry along with her minor child at her parents’ house. The material on record further discloses that the respondent/husband filed H.M.O.P.No.85 of 2025 on the file of the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Narsipatnam, seeking dissolution of marriage under Section 13(1) (ia)(ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and the same is pending adjudication. 3 (VGKR,J TR.C.M.P.NO.138 OF 2026) 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 for the petitioner 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 of the husband and therefore, I 1(2000) 10 SCC 304 2 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 627 4 (VGKR,J TR.C.M.P.NO.138 OF 2026) 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.85 of 2025 on the file of the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Narsipatnam to the file of the learned IX Additional District Court-cum-Judge, Family Court at Rajamahendravaram. 11. In the result, the present Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is allowed, and H.M.O.P.No.85 of 2025 on the file of the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Narsipatnam is hereby withdrawn and transferred to the file of the learned IX Additional District Court-cum-Judge, Family Court at Rajamahendravaram. The learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Narsipatnam shall transmit the case record in H.M.O.P.No.85 of 2025, to the file of the learned IX Additional District Court-cum-Judge, Family Court at Rajamahendravaram, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of one (01) week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 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: 16.06.2026 RPD. 5 (VGKR,J TR.C.M.P.NO.138 OF 2026) 33 THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V. GOPALA KRISHNA RAO (ALLOWED) TRANSFER CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.138 of 2026 Date : 16.06.2026 RPD.