THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V. GOPALA KRISHNA RAO TRANSFER CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.15 of 2026

ORDER:

Today, when the matter has been taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that, proof of service Memo has been field before the Registry on 24.02.2026 vide U.S.R.No.23757 of 2026, along with the postal Acknowledgement and the same has been placed on record. As per the memo, the registered notice sent to the respondent was served on 10.02.2026. Despite service of notice, there is no representation on behalf of respondent.

Therefore, ‘service held sufficient’.

2. 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 the H.M.O.P.No.4 of 2025, on the file of learned Senior Civil Judge, Adoni, Kurnool District, and transfer the same to the file of Family Court, Vijayawada, N.T.R. District for trial and disposal.

3. 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 26.01.2023 as per Hindu Marriage customs and rituals.

Thereafter, due to matrimonial disputes between the parties, the petitioner/wife has been residing separately in her parents’ house at Vijayawada. The petitioner lodged a complaint which is registered as Crime No.378 of 2024, for the offences under Section 85 of B.N.S., 2023 and Section 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and a Charge-Sheet was laid and the same is numbered as C.C.No.5159 of 2024 on the file of learned IV Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Vijayawada and the same is pending for adjudication.

ii. The petitioner further pleaded that the respondent/husband, to cause inconvenience to the petitioner, filed H.M.O.P.No.4 of 2025, on the file of learned Senior Civil Judge, Adoni, Kurnool District, seeking for Restitution of Conjugal Rights, under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and the same is pending for adjudication. The petitioner further pleaded that the distance between Vijayawada and Adoni is approximately 350 kms, and that it is very difficult for the petitioner/wife to appear before the learned Senior Civil Judge, Adoni, on each and every adjournment without any male assistance, and that she is constrained to file this petition.

4. Heard Sri Nagendra Babu Kappera, learned counsel for the petitioner.

5. Perused the material available on record.

6. The material on record prima facie shows that, in view of the matrimonial disputes between the parties, the petitioner/wife has been residing separately in her parents’ house at Vijayawada and depending upon the mercy of her parents. The material on record further discloses that the respondent/husband filed a divorce petition against the petitioner/wife vide H.M.O.P.No.4 of 2025, on the file of learned Senior Civil Judge, Adoni, Kurnool District, seeking for Restitution of Conjugal Rights under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, the same is pending for adjudication.

7. The Apex Court in a case of GEETA HEERA Vs HARISH CHANDER HEERA, 1(2000) 10 SCC 304 , 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.”

8. The Apex Court in a case of N.C.V. Aishwarya Vs A.S.Saravana Karthik Sha, 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 627 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 th