Bikki Mamatha, v. Bikki Govardhan,

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M.SEETHARAMA MURTI Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition No.342 of 2016 ORDER:

This is a petition by the wife under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, requesting to withdraw OP.No.109 of 2015 on the file of the Court of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Khammam, and transfer the same to the file of the Court of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Suryapet of Nalgonda District, for trial and disposal in accordance with law. 2.

I have heard the submissions of Sri Karri Murali Krishna, learned counsel for the petitioner-wife. As per the submissions of the learned counsel, notice once sent to the respondent was returned with postal endorsement 'refused' and that notice sent to the counsel for the respondent in the proceedings before the trial Court was served. None appears. 3.

I have perused the material record.

4.

Sans un-necessary allegations, the case of the petitioner-wife in support of her request for transfer, in brief, is as follows: - 'She is a house wife aged 32 years. After separation she is living with her parents at Kukkadam village of Thungathurthy Mandal of Nalgonda District. She is having custody of a nineyear-old girl child, who is pursuing her studies. The husband is a resident of Arempula village of Khammam District. She has no income or sources of income. She filed a maintenance case (MC.No.04 of 2016) on the file of the Court of the learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Thungathurthy, for award of maintenance to her and her daughter. She has also filed a Domestic Violence Case (DVC.No.1 of 2016) before the same Court.

While so, the husband filed the OP for divorce under the provisions of Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, at Khammam, only to harass her. In the circumstances she is placed, she is unable to undertake travel on the date of every adjournment to attend the Court case at Khammam. Therefore, she filed the present petition seeking transfer of the OP filed by the husband.'

5.

The husband is not resisting the petition.

6.

I have given earnest consideration to the facts and submissions. In the Indian context an earning male person is certainly better placed as he can undertake travel all alone safely at all times (day or night) when compared to a non-earning female or a house wife. If necessary, he can spend a night at a place where he has no relatives or friends to stay with. The same cannot equally be said of a house wife. As per the settled legal position and preponderance of authority, more particularly, in the light of the fact that the wife is having custody of a nine-year-old girl child, the convenience of wife shall prevail and shall be preferred unless there are special circumstances warranting taking a different view. The respondent/ husband, having not entered appearance, has not shown any special circumstances to take a different view.

In the case on hand, on consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions, this Court does not find any special circumstances to take a different view and deny the relief to the petitioner-wife. Thus, this Court is satisfied that sufficient case is made out for granting the relief as prayed for in the petition. 7.

In the result, the petition is allowed and OP.No.109 of 2015 on the file of the Court of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Khammam, is withdrawn from the file of the said Court and is transferred to the file of the Court of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Suryapet of Nalgonda District, for trial and disposal in accordance with the procedure established by law. No costs. Miscellaneous petitions pending if any in this TRCMP shall stand closed. _____________________ M. SEETHARAMA MURTI, J 29th December, 2016 Vjl