Research › Search › Judgment

Andhra High Court · body

2000 DIGILAW 104 (AP)

Jane Devi Nageswari v. K. Ram Babu

2000-02-16

G.BIKSHAPATHY

body2000
G. BIKSHAPATHY, J. ( 1 ) THE Transfer CMP is filed seeking transfer of O. P. No. 437/99, pending on the file of the Family Court, Visakhapatnam, to be transferred to the Family Court, hyderabad, and tried along with O. P. No. 359/99, which is pending before the family Court, Hyderabad. ( 2 ) THE petitioner is the wife. She filed an application in O. P. No. 359/99, seeking a decree for nullity of marriage, before the family Court, Hyderabad. It appears that the respondent-husband filed an application in O. P. No. 437/99 before the family Court, Visakhapatnam, seeking restitution of conjugal rights. It is also brought to the notice by the Counsel for the petitioner that, at present, the petitioner is working as a Medical Officer at Anantapur. It is the case of the petitioner that it would cause inconvenience for her to attend the courts both at Visakhapatnam and hyderabad at the same time, and that it will be in the interests of both parties, if the O. P. pending before the Family Court, visakhapatnam is transferred to Family court, Hyderabad, and tried jointly. ( 3 ) THOUGH the learned Counsel for the petitioner tried to refer to certain merits of the case, I am not inclined to entertain such contentions on the merits. ( 4 ) LEARNED Counsel for the respondent submits that various allegations were levelled against the respondent-husband by the petitioner-wife and as the allegations are made in a disrespectful manner and that the witnesses, which are sought to be examined in support of the case of the respondent in O. P. No. 437/99, are from visakhapatnam, and it will be in the interests of parties, if the case before the family Court, Hyderabad, is transferred to the Family Court, Visakhapatnam, and tried jointly. ( 5 ) I have given serious consideration to the matter. I am not inclined to delve into the merits of the case as it is for the lower court to decide the same on the basis of the evidence and material available on record. Be that as it may, the present situation boils down to this point. The husband is working at Visakhapatnam and the wife is working at Anantapur, and the O. P. filed by the husband is pending before the Family court, Visakhapatnam, and another O. P. filed by the wife is pending before the family Court, Hyderabad. Be that as it may, the present situation boils down to this point. The husband is working at Visakhapatnam and the wife is working at Anantapur, and the O. P. filed by the husband is pending before the Family court, Visakhapatnam, and another O. P. filed by the wife is pending before the family Court, Hyderabad. It is seen that both the O. Ps have to be necessarily dealt with by one Court, as the application for nullity of marriage and application for restitution of conjugal rights are to be jointly dealt with for giving a complete quietus to the matrimonial litigation. ( 6 ) IT is not the case of the respondent that he is not able to move out of visakhapatnam, so as to consider the matter in other respects. Since both the parties are residing at two different places, transferring the same to a common place cannoi inconvenience them and on the other hand, it facilitates the case to be disposed of without there being any problem. Under these circumstances, I am inclined to transfer O. P. No. 437/99 on the file of the family Court, Visakhapatnam, to the family Court, Hyderabad, for joint disposal along with O. P. 359/99. ( 7 ) ACCORDINGLY, the Transfer CMP is allowed. The O. P. No. 437/99, pending on the file of the Family Court, visakhapatnam, shall be transferred to the family Court, Hyderabad, to be tried along with O. P. No. 359/99. The lower Court shall dispose of the case on expeditious basis, probably, within six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Both the parties to the petition shall co-operate with the trial Court and ensure that the matter is disposed of as directed in this order. No costs.