Mrs. G. Shirisha, Hyderabad v. Mr. M Vinodh Kumar, Visakhapatnam

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T.SUNIL CHOWDARY Tr.C.M.P.No.19 of 2017 ORDER:

This petition is filed under Section 24 of C.P.C. seeking to withdraw O.P.No.1462 of 2016 from the file of the Family Court at Visakhapatnam and transfer the same to the file of the Family Court, City Civil Court at Hyderabad.

2.

In spite of service of notice, the respondent did not choose to appear and oppose the petition. Hence, this Court is inclined to pass orders on merits.

3.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. 4.

A perusal of the record reveals that the marriage of the petitioner was performed with the respondent on 21.04.2016 at Swagath Grand Hotel, Nagol, Hyderabad, as per Hindu Rites and Caste Customs. Immediately after the marriage, the petitioner joined the respondent to lead marital life. For one reason or other, disputes arose between the petitioner and respondent; therefore, the petitioner has been residing at her parents' house in Hyderabad. The petitioner filed M.C.No.13 of 2017, under Section 125 Cr.P.C., on the file of the Jubilee Hills Bomb Blast Court, Nampally, against the respondent seeking maintenance. While things stood thus, the respondent filed O.P.No.1462 of 2016, under Section 9 of Hindu Marriage Act, on the file of the Family Court at Visakhapatnam, against the petitioner for restitution of conjugal rights.

5.

It is the case of the petitioner that she is facing much difficulty to travel from Hyderabad to Visakhapatnam in order to

prosecute O.P.No.1462 of 2016. Invariably, the respondent has to attend the Criminal Court at Nampally, in view of pendency of M.C.No.13 of 2017.

6.

While deciding the petitions of this nature, the Court has to take into consideration the inconvenience likely to be caused to the parties to the proceedings, more particularly, to the wife and children. As per the principle enunciated in T.Gayatri Devi v. Dr. Tallepaneni Sreekanth1, Rachna Kanodia v. Anuk Kanodia2 and Sumita Singh v. Kumar Sanjay and another3, the paramount consideration, in transfer of matrimonial cases, is the convenience of the wife.

7.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and also the principle enunciated in the cases cited supra, I am of the considered view that the relief sought by the petitioner deserves to be granted.

8.

In the result, the Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is allowed. O.P.No.1462 of 2016 is withdrawn from the file of the Family Court at Visakhapatnam, and transferred to the file of the Family Court, City Civil Court at Hyderabad, for disposal in accordance with law. There shall be no order as to costs. 9.

Consequently, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition shall stand closed. _________________________ T.SUNIL CHOWDARY, J Date: 08.10.2018 Ivd 1 2013 (6) ALT 42 (SC) 2 2001 (7) Supreme 96 3 AIR 2002 SC 396