O R D E R:

This Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed by the petitioner/wife under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure (in short “CPC”), seeking transfer of HMOP.No.124 of 2018 on the file of Principal Senior Civil Judge’s Court, Kovvur of West Godavari District to Principal Senior Civil Judge’s Court at Kakinada.

2. The case of the petitioner/wife in brief is that her marriage with the respondent solemnized on 13.02.2016 in a function hall at Chagallu village of West Godavari District, as per Hindu rites and customs prevailing in their community. The petitioner submits that after the marriage, she joined the respondent to lead marital life. It is the contention of the petitioner that the respondent is having suspicious mind used to suspect her fidelity, and he used to beat her without her fault, who also harassed her on demand of additional dowry, and made propaganda that she has been affected with HIV only to get rid of her, and necked her out from matrimonial home in the year 2017, and thereafter all the efforts made through the elders for amicable settlement failed. It is also the contention of the petitioner that to cover-up his misdeeds, the respondents filed HMOP No.124 of 2018 on the file of Principal Senior Civil Judge’s Court, at Kovvur, seeking divorce, and thereafter she lodged a report before the DISHA Police Station, Kakinada against the respondent, who registered the case for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 323 read with 34 of IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The petitioner also said to be filed MC No.32 of 2022 on the file of V Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kakinada, seeking maintenance, as the respondent is working as an Accountant in Samishta International School, and drawing salary. The main contention of the petitioner is that she has no source of income to travel all the way from Kakinada to Kovvuru, which is at a distance of 70 kms to put-forth her defense in the divorce petition filed by her husband, and other two cases filed by her are pending before the Courts at Kakinada. She prays to allow the petition.

3. The respondent filed counter-affidavit, denying the averments in the affidavit of the petitioner. It is the contention of the respondent that only to drag on the divorce proceedings, the petitioner came up with this transfer petition, and also filed maintenance case, and lodged a false report against him. He submits that the distance between Kakinada to Kovvur is only 70 kms, which involves journey of only one hour, and the divorce petition filed by him is coming up for arguments, and there are no grounds to transfer the case. He prays to dismiss the petition.

4. I have heard both sides.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that now the petitioner is residing in her parents’ house, which is at a distance of 70 kms from Kovvur, where the respondent filed petition, seeking for divorce. She would further submit that the petitioner has no source of income to bear travel and other expenses at Kovvur to put-forth her defense in divorce petition filed by her husband. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that two other cases are pending before the Courts at Kakinada, where the respondent has to attend, due to that it may not be inconvenient for him, if the divorce petition filed by him is transferred to Principal Senior Civil Judge’s Court, Kakinada. She prays to allow the petition.

6. The learned counsel for the respondent would submit that divorce petition filed by the respondent is now coming up for arguments, but the petitioner came up with this petition only to drag on the proceedings. She prays to dismiss the petition.

7. It is not in dispute that the respondent filed HMOP No.124 of 2018, and thereafter the petitioner lodged a report before the Station House Officer, DISHA Police Station, and also filed MC No.32 of 2022 before the Courts at Kakinada. The respondent filed HMOP No.124 of 2018 aga