Smt.P.Gayatri v. N.Srinivasulu

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE T. SUNIL CHOWDARY TRANSFER CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.324 of 2013 ORDER:

This petition is filed under Section 24 C.P.C., to withdraw O.P.No.183 of 2013 from the file of the Family Court, Ranga Reddy District and transfer the same to the Family Court, Kurnool.

2. Heard both counsel and perused the material available on record.

3. The marriage of the petitioner was performed with the respondent on 05.06.2003 at Gurramkonda, Chittoor District, as per Hindu rites and caste customs. Immediately after the marriage, the petitioner joined the respondent to lead marital life. The petitioner filed M.C.No.14 of 2014 on the file of the Family Court, Kurnool seeking maintenance from the respondent. The respondent filed O.P.No.183 of 2013 on the file of the Family Court, Ranga Reddy District for dissolution of marriage between him and the petitioner.

4. The petitioner has been residing at her parents' house at Kurnool due to misunderstandings between her and the respondent. The petitioner and the respondents are close relatives. The respondent has been working as Jawan in Indian Army and at present he is working in Jammu & Kashmir. It may not be possible for the petitioner to travel from Kurnool to Hyderabad to prosecute O.P.No.183 of 2013. If the petition is dismissed, it may cause untold hardship to the petitioner. Even if the petition is allowed, the same may not cause any prejudice to the respondent. While disposing of the petitions of this nature, the Court has to take into consideration the ground realities as well as the hardship likely to be caused to the wife. 5.

As per the principle enunciated in V.Sailaja v V.Koteswara Rao[1], Sumita Singh v. Kumar Sanjay[2] and

Rachna Kanodia v. Anuk Kanodia[3], the paramount consideration, in transfer of matrimonial cases, is the convenience of the wife. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and also the principle enunciated in the case cited supra, I am of the considered view that the relief sought by the petitioner can be granted. 6.

As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the respondent it may not be possible for the respondent to attend the Family Court, Kurnool in O.P.No.183 of 2013 on each and every date of adjournment in view of his nature of employment. Even if the presence of the respondent is dispensed with no prejudice would be caused to the petitioner.

7. For these reasons, O.P.No.183 of 2013 is withdrawn from the file of the Family Court, Ranga Reddy District and transferred to the Family Court, Kurnool. The Family Court, Kurnool is hereby directed to dispense with the presence of respondent/husband for each and every date of adjournment. However, the respondent shall appear as and when the Court feels that his presence is so required.

8. Accordingly, the Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is allowed. No costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending in this civil miscellaneous petition, shall stand closed. _________________________ T.SUNIL CHOWDARY, J.

Date: 28.07.2015.

Gvl [1] AIR 2003 AP 178 = 2003 (1) ALD 673 = 2003 (1) APLJ 441 [2] AIR 2002 SC 396 [3] 2001 (7) Supreme 96