In matrimonial disputes, the convenience of the wife is prioritized, especially under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure considering socio-economic circumstances.

ORDER:

V.GOPALA KRISHNA RAO, J

1. The petitioner/wife filed the present petition under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, seeking to withdraw F.C.O.P.No.2416 of 2021 on the file of the V Additional District Judge-Cum-Family Court Judge at Visakhapatnam and transfer the same to the Senior Civil Judge at Sompeta Srikakulam District.

2. The case of the petitioner in brief is as follows:

I. The petitioner is the legally wedded wife of the respondent No.1 and their marriage has been performed at Srikakulam District on 06.02.1998, as per Hindu rites and customs. In view of the matrimonial disputes between both the parties, the petitioner/wife along with her children aged about 23 years and 20 years are staying at her parents’ house at Sompeta, Srikakulam District and depending upon the mercy of her parents. The petitioner pleaded that she had lodged a Criminal Case before Sompeta Police Station under Section 4 98-A IPC and under Sections 3 & 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and the same was numbered as C.C.No.396 of 2022, on the file of the Principal Junior Civil Judge at Sompeta and the same is pending for adjudication against the respondent No.1/husband. The petitioner further pleaded that she had filed a Maintenance Case vide M.C.No.05 of 2025, on the file of the Principal Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Sompeta and the respondent No.1/husband is attending the Court proceedings before the competent Courts at Sompeta. The learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that to cause inconvenience to the petitioner, the respondent No.1/husband had filed F.C.O.P.No.2416 of 2021, on the file of the V Additional District Judge-Cum-Family Court Judge at Visakhapatnam, under Section 13(1)(ia) of the HINDU MARRIAGE ACT , 1955, seeking for dissolution of marriage.

II. Learned counsel for the petitioner further contended that the petitioner being a woman and having children aged about 23 years and 20 years, depending upon the mercy of her parents, it is very difficult for her to travel at a distance of more than 230Kms from Sompeta to Visakhapatnam for attending the case proceedings before the learned V Additional District Judge-Cum-Family Court Judge at Visakhapatnam, on each and every date of adjournment without any male support and that she was constrained to file the present petition against the respondent/husbandseeking to withdraw F.C.O.P.No.2416 of 2021, on the file of the V Additional District Judge-Cum-Family Court Judge at Visakhapatnam and transfer the same to the Senior Civil Judge at Sompeta, SrikakulamDistrict.

3. Learned counsel for the respondent would contend that there are no grounds to allow the transfer petition filed by the petitioner seeking transfer from V Additional District Judge-Cum-Family Court Judge at Visakhapatnam to the Senior Civil Judge at Sompeta, Srikakulam District and requested this Court to dismiss the present transfer civil miscellaneous petition. He further contended that the respondent No.1 is a permanent employee at HPCL (Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited) and is staying at Bombay, if this Court is inclined to transfer the case from Visakhapatnam to Sompeta, the personal attendance of the respondent No.1/ husband may be dispensed with before the transferee Court.

4. Heard Sri P.B.V.Koteswara Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Harinath Reddy Soma, learned counsel for the respondent. Perused the material available on record.

5. The material on record prima facie goes to show that in view of the matrimonial disputes between both the parties, the petitioner/wife along with her children aged about 23 years and 20 y