Research › Search › Judgment

Andhra High Court · body

2003 DIGILAW 465 (AP)

Kolli Shallaja Rani v. K. V. Ramana Prasad

2003-03-21

P.S.NARAYANA

body2003
( 1 ) HEARD the learned counsel. ( 2 ) THIS transfer c. m. p. is field by the petitioner/wife against the respondent/ husband. The wife prays for transfer of o. P. No. 47 of 2001 on the file of the Senior civil Judge, Medak District at Sangareddy to the file of the Senior Civil Judge, rangareddy District at L. B. Nagar and pass such other suitable orders. ( 3 ) SRI K. Shankaraiah, learned counsel representing the wife had taken me through the averments made by the petitioner in the affidavit filed in support of the transfer c. m. p. The learned counsel also submitted that apart from the grounds raised in the said affidavit, the convenience of the wife has to be taken into consideration. The learned counsel also submitted that the respondent/husband though conscious of the fact that the Senior Civil Judge at sangareddy has no jurisdiction to entertain the O. P. , has invoking the jurisdiction of the said court with an ulterior motive. ( 4 ) PER contra, Sri Nalin Kumar, learned counsel had taken me to the allegation made in the counter affidavit and had explained that the wife came up with the transfer c. m. p. with false allegations only with a view to get the matter transferred to put him into trouble. The learned counsel had explained the distance between the, places and had submitted that absolutely there is no inconvenience to the wife to proceed with the matter at Sangareddy. ( 5 ) HEARD the learned counsel and perused the material available on record. ( 6 ) THE facts in brief for the purpose of disposal of the present transfer c. m. p. are as hereunder: the petitioner is the legally wedded wife of the respondent and she had begotten 2 male children also out of the wedlock. It is also stated that the family had been residing in their own residential plot No. 204, panchavati Apartment, Bhagyanagar colony, Opposite to K. P. H. B. Kukatpally, hyderabad. Certain allegations relating to the harassment of the husband also had been averred. It is further stated that the respondent had filed O. P. No. 47 of 2001 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge at sangareddy against her seeking dissolution of marriage with false and frivolous allegations. Certain allegations relating to the harassment of the husband also had been averred. It is further stated that the respondent had filed O. P. No. 47 of 2001 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge at sangareddy against her seeking dissolution of marriage with false and frivolous allegations. It is stated that the petitioner appeared in the said case and filed I. A. No. 338 of 2002 for interim maintenance for her and for her two minor children. It is further stated that the respondent instead of filing counter in the said application, had chosen to file yet another application tot vacation of O. P. with a view to protract the matter. It was also specifically averred that no cause of action arose within the jurisdiction of the Senior Civil Judge, sangareddy but only with a view to put the petitioner into trouble, the said court was chosen by the respondent/husband. Several grounds also had been raised and it was specifically averred to no cause of action arose at BHEL as the petitioner and respondent together never resided in the alleged quarter in BHEL. It was also specifically stated that they last resided at plot No. 204, Panchavati Apartment, bhagyanagar Colony, which comes within the territorial jurisdiction of the courts at rangareddy District at L. B. Nagar. Certain allegations relating to the two minor children and the studies in schools also had been averred. It was further stated that the respondent is bent upon to get rid of the petitioner by putting her to physical torture if possible by using some sort of methods while she will be attending Sangareddy court to attend the case and she apprehends danger to her life also. In the said circumstances, the petitioner/wife prays for the transfer of O. P. No. 47 of 2001 to the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Ranga reddy District at L. B. Nagar. ( 7 ) THE respondent/husband had also filed an elaborate counter affidavit denying the allegations. In the said circumstances, the petitioner/wife prays for the transfer of O. P. No. 47 of 2001 to the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Ranga reddy District at L. B. Nagar. ( 7 ) THE respondent/husband had also filed an elaborate counter affidavit denying the allegations. It was stated that they were married on 18-03-1984 at Tirumala tirupathi Devasthanam, Tirupathi and during the wedlock, the petitioner gave birth to two children and after the marriage, they stayed only at BHEL township and it was the matrimonial home and then they had shifted to quarter in BHEL township and later shifted to another quarter and before allotment of quarters, they stayed in certain private houses during 1984 to 1991. It was specifically stated that the respondent never shifted house to kukatpalli. Several allegations relating to the mental agony and cruelty had been pleaded. It was also stated that in LA. No. 338 of 2002 she claimed interim maintenance and the same is still pending. There is a specific denial that the petitioner and respondent along with the children had ever resided at plot No. 204, Panchavati apartment, Bhagyanagar Colony, Opposite to K. P. H. B. , Kukatpally, Hyderabad. Certain allegations relating to the sanction of loan also had been narrated. At paragraph 10 it was specifically stated that it is easier to go from Kukatpally to sangareddy and only with a view to put him into trouble, the transfer C. M. P. is filed. ( 8 ) SEVERAL other allegations were made by both the parties in the affidavit filed in support of the transfer petition and the counter affidavit on the aspect of transfer. Apart from the said allegations. Several other allegations relating to the ill-treatment and cruelty also had been averred and I am of the considered opinion that false allegations and counter allegations need not be gone into at this stage and it is needless to say that the said allegations have to be proved by putting forth evidence in the main matrimonial proceedings at the appropriate stage. ( 9 ) IT is not in dispute that the petitioner is working as Junior Assistant in JNTU and the minor children also are studying in schools. No doubt, the respondent/ husband also had taken a specific stand that from Kukatpally to Sangareddy, r. R. District, the distance is almost an equal distance. ( 9 ) IT is not in dispute that the petitioner is working as Junior Assistant in JNTU and the minor children also are studying in schools. No doubt, the respondent/ husband also had taken a specific stand that from Kukatpally to Sangareddy, r. R. District, the distance is almost an equal distance. The petitioner apart from the aforesaid inconvenience had stated that she apprehends danger to her life and it is not safe for her to go over to Sangareddy, to attend the court. The other main ground on which the petitioner/wife is seeking transfer to the Senior Civil Judge, at Ranga reddy at L. B. Nagar is on the point of jurisdiction. While deciding the Transfer c. M. P. , incidentally, the question of jurisdiction may be gone into, but, however, the said question will not come in the way while considering the transfer cm. p. , in the light of the powers conferred on this court under Section 24 of C. P. C. Hence, this question virtually falls into in-significance. Taking these facts and circumstances into consideration, the stand taken by the petitioner in the transfer c. m. p. , that the court of Senior Civil Judge at Ranga Reddy will be convenient also cannot be accepted. However, in view of the allegations made in the affidavit filed in support of the transfer c. m. p. , which no doubt had been denied by the husband. In my considered opinion, taking the convenience of both the parties into consideration, O. P. No. 47 of 2001 on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Medak district at Sangareddy is hereby withdrawn and transferred to the Family Court, secunderabad for the purpose of disposal of the same in accordance with law. ( 10 ) THE transfer C. M. P. is accordingly ordered. No costs.