SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(AP) 20386

HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH
VENUTHURUMALLI GOPALA KRISHNA RAO
MARE PUSHPANJALI SUNEETHA KUMARI – Appellant
Versus
MARE GURAPPADU – Respondent
TRCMP 64/2026



APHC010062802026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [3397]

AT AMARAVATI (Special Original Jurisdiction)

TUESDAY,THE FIFTH DAY OF MAY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY SIX PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENUTHURUMALLI GOPALA KRISHNA RAO TRANS. CIVIL MISC.PETITION NO: 64/2026 Between:

1. M ARE PUSHPANJALI SUNEETHA KUMARI, W/O.

GURAPPADU, AGED 32 YEARS, HINDU, RIO. PATHUR VILLAGE, NAGAPATNAM POST, KHAJIPET MANDAL, KADAPA DISTRICT, A.P-

...PETITIONER AND

1. M ARE GURAPPADU, S/o. Chinna Gurappadu, Aged 32 years, Hindu, Occ Chicken Business, Chinthalapalle Village, Komarole Mandal, Prakasham District, A.P-

...RESPONDENT Petition Under Section 24 of the C.P.C. Praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed therewith,the High Court may be pleased toPleased to withdraw the withdraw the H.M.O.P. No.115/2025 on the file of the Hon'ble Senior Civil Judge, Markapur and transfer the same to Hon'ble Senior Civil Judge Court at Kadapa in the interest justice.

IA NO: 1 OF 2026 Petition under Section 151 CPC praying that in the circumstances stated in the affidavit filed in support of the petition, the High Court may be pleased pleased to grant stay of all further proceedings in H.M.O.P No.115/2025 on the file of the Hon'ble Senior Civil Judge, Markapur, pending disposal of the Tr.CMP. in the interest of justic Counsel for the Petitioner:

1. P NAGENDRA REDDY Counsel for the Respondent:

1. SIVAPRASAD REDDY VENATI The Court made the following:

THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE VENUTHURUMALLI GOPALA KRISHNA RAO TRANSFER CIVIL MISCELLENOUS PETITION NO: 64/2026

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 transfer the H.M.O.P.No.115 of 2025, on the file of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Markapur, to the file of the learned Senior Civil Judge Court, Kadapa, 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 14.03.2015 at Chinthalapalem Village, Komarole Mandal. Thereafter, due to matrimonial disputes between the parties, the petitioner/wife has been residing separately at Kadapa in her parents’

house.

ii. The petitioner submitted that she had lodged a complaint, which was registered as Crime.No.136 of 2025, for the offences punishable under Sections 85, r/w 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, and Sections 3 & 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, before the Khajipet Police Station, the same is pending for investigation. She further stated that she has also filed a maintenance case, vide M.C. No.16 of 2022 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Mydukuru, and the same is pending for adjudication.

iii. The petitioner further pleaded that the respondent/husband, to cause inconvenience to the petitioner, filed H.M.O.P.No.115 of 2025, on the file of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Markapur, seeking restitution of conjugal rights, under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, and the same is pending for adjudication. The petitioner further pleaded that the distance between Kadapa and Markapur is approximately 200 Kilometers and it is very difficult for the petitioner/wife to appear before the court at Markapur, on each and every adjournment without any male assistance, and that she is constrained to file this petition.

3. The respondent has filed his counter-affidavit by denying the material allegations leveled in the transfer petition filed by the petitioner and there are no merits in the transfer petition filed by the petitioner and requested to dismiss the present Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition.

4. Heard Sri P.Nagendra Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioner/wife and Sri Venati Siva Prasad Reddy, learned counsel for the respondent/husband.

5. Perused the material available on record.

6. The material on record prima facie shows that, in view of the matrimonial disputes between the parti

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top