COMMON ORDER:

Tr.C.M.P.No.489 of 2013 is filed by the wife under Section 24 C.P.C., seeking for withdrawal of O.P.No.895 of 2012 from the file of the Family Court, City Civil Court, Hyderabad, and to transfer the same to the file of the Family Court, Visakhapatnam.

2. Tr.C.M.P.No.536 of 2013 is filed by the husband to withdraw F.C.O.P.No.66 of 2012 from the file of the Family Court, Visakhapatnam and transfer the same to Family Court, Hyderabad.

3. Tr.C.M.P.No.140 of 2014 is filed by the husband to withdraw G.O.P.No.937 of 2012 from the file of the Judge, Family Court – cum – V Additional District Court, Visakhapatnam, and transfer the same to Family Court, Hyderabad.

4. The issue involved in all the matters is one and the same and the parties are also one and the same, hence, I am inclined to dispose of these three matters by passing this common order.

5. The parties will be referred to as they are arrayed in O.P.No.489 of 2013 for the sake of convenience.

6. The facts leading to filing of the present petitions are briefly as follows: The marriage of the petitioner was performed with the respondent on 26.11.2013 at Kavali of Nellore District as per Hindu rites and caste customs. Immediately after the marriage, the petitioner joined the respondent to lead happy marital life. The petitioner and the respondent lived together for some time at Nellore, Hyderabad and Visakhapatnam. Out of their lawful wedlock, the petitioner and respondent were blessed with a son and a daughter, who are now aged about 11 years and 9 years respectively. The petitioner has been working as Assistant Professor in Andhra University, Visakhapatnam. The respondent has been doing civil contracts at Hyderabad. The petitioner and respondent lived together happily up to 2011. Bad weather prevailed in the family life of the petitioner and respondent. On 11.01.2012 the respondent filed F.C.O.P.No.66 of 2012 on the file of Family Court, Visakhapatnam for dissolution of marriage between them. In the month of July 2012, the petitioner filed O.P.No.937 of 2012 seeking custody of the children on the file of Family Court, Visakhapatnam. The respondent filed O.P.No.895 of 2012 on the file of Family Court, Hyderabad, seeking custody of the children. C.C.No.591 of 2012 is also pending on the file of I Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam between the parties. Petitioner filed one transfer petition, i.e., Tr.C.M.P.No.489 of 2013, whereas, respondent filed two transfer petitions, i.e., Tr.C.M.P.Nos.536 of 2013 and 140 of 2014. Both parties opposing the transfer petitions filed by other party.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioner/wife submitted that it is very difficult for the petitioner to attend the Court at Hyderabad. Learned counsel for the respondent/husband submitted that being a contractor, it may not be possible for the respondent to attend the Court at Visakhapatnam. There is no dispute between the parties with regard to their relationship. Admittedly, the children are residing along with their father, i.e., the respondent. While deciding this type of petitions, the Court has to take into consideration the inconvenience as well as the hardship likely to be caused to the parties to the proceedings. It is not uncommon to make allegations and counter allegations against each other in family matters in order to gain the sympathy of the Court. Whether the respondent has forcibly taken the custody of the children or not, is a question of fact to be determined in Guardian OP Nos.895 of 2012 and 937 of 2012. It is needless to say that the Court is not supposed to express any opinion touching the merits of the main case while deciding the transfer petitions. Therefore, I am not inclined to express any opinion touching the merits of the main cases. The Court has to confine itself to the convenience or inconvenience likely to be caused to the parties to the proceedings. As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner, it may not be possible for