THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE V. GOPALA KRISHNA RAO TRANSFER CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.277 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 to withdraw the F.C.O.P.No.148 of 2025, on the file of Family Court-cum-VI Additional District Judge, Nellore and to transfer the same to the file of Family Court- cum-VIII Additional District Judge, Ongole, 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 15.02.2019 at M/s. Vayugundla Brahmaiah Kalyana Mandapam, Nellore, 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 Ongole along with her male child.

ii. The petitioner further pleaded that the respondent/husband, to cause inconvenience to the petitioner, filed F.C.O.P.No.148 of 2025, on the file of Family Court-Cum-VI Additional District Judge, Nellore, seeking for dissolution of the marriage under Section 13(1)(ia), of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, the same is pending for adjudication. The petitioner further pleaded that the distance between Ongole and Nellore is approximately 150 kms, and that it is very difficult for the petitioner/wife to appear before the Court of the Judge, Family Court-Cum-VI Additional District Judge, Nellore, on each and every adjournment without any male assistance, and that she is constrained to file this petition.

3. Heard learned counsel on both sides.

4. Perused the material available on record.

5. Learned counsel for the respondent appearing through virtual mode represented that without going into merits of case, he has no objection to transfer the F.C.O.P.No.148 of 2025 from the file of Family Court-cum-VI Additional District Judge, Nellore to the file of Family Court-cum-VIII Additional District Judge, Ongole, and the same is reiterated in paragraph No.9 in the counter-affidavit filed by the respondent. 6. 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.”

7. 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 their livelihood and under whose protective umbrella they are seeking their sustenance to life. Given the prevailing socio- economic paradigm in the Indian

(2000) 10 SCC 304

society, generally, it is the wife’s convenience which must be looked at while considering transfer.”

8. On considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respondent herein 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 am of the considered view that there are justifiable grounds to consider the request made by the petitioner/wife seeking transfer of F.C.O.P.No.148 of 2025, on the file of Family Court-cum-VI Additional District Judge, Nellore, to the file of Family Court-cum-VIII Additional District Judge, Ongole, Prakasam District.

9. In the result, the present