Research › Search › Judgment

Telangana High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 456 (TS)

Cherala Arundhathi v. Cherala Pramod Kumar

2020-06-09

SHAMEEM AKTHER

body2020
JUDGMENT Shameem Akther, J. - This Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition, under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, is filed by the petitioner/wife, requesting to withdraw O.P.No.2730 of 2018 from the file of Judge, Family Court, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar and transfer the same to the file of Judge, Family Court, Karimnagar, for trial and disposal, in accordance with law. 2. Heard the learned counsel for both sides and perused the record. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner/wife would submit that the petitioner had already filed two cases i.e, C.C.No.1116 of 2019 before the Special Judicial First Class Magistrate, Karimnagar, for the offence under Section 498-A IPC & Section 4 of D.P.Act and DVC No.49 of 2019 before the Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Karimnagar, under Section 12 of protection of women from Domestic Violence Act, 2015 (D.V.Act) seeking maintenance against the respondent/husband and both these cases are pending at Karimnagar. The petitioner/wife resides at Kelleda Village, Manakondur Mandal, Karimnagar District. She is pursuing her post-graduation at Kakatiya University, Warangal. The Family Court situated at Karimnagar is convenient for her to attend the Court and defend the subject O.P filed by the respondent/husband and ultimately prayed to allow the transfer petition as prayed for. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent/ husband would submit that the Family Court situated at Warangal is convenient to both parties. There are no sustainable grounds to consider the request of the petitioner and ultimately, prayed to dismiss the transfer application. 5. In view of the submissions made by both sides, the point for determination is: "Whether O.P.No.2730 of 2018 pending on the file of Judge, Family Court, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar, can be withdrawn and transferred to the file of Judge, Family Court, Karimnagar, for trial and disposal, in accordance with law?" 6. Point: When a proposal is made on behalf of the respondent/husband by the counsel on record that the subject O.P. can be transferred to the Family Court situated at Warangal, where the petitioner/wife is prosecuting her postgraduation course in Kakatiya University, the petitioner/wife did not agree for the said proposal. Point: When a proposal is made on behalf of the respondent/husband by the counsel on record that the subject O.P. can be transferred to the Family Court situated at Warangal, where the petitioner/wife is prosecuting her postgraduation course in Kakatiya University, the petitioner/wife did not agree for the said proposal. The main grounds urged on behalf of the petitioner/wife are that two cases i.e, C.C.No.1116 of 2019 and DVC No.49 of 2019 filed by the petitioner/wife are pending at Karimnagar and as she resides at Kelleda Village, Manakondur Mandal, Karimnagar District, the Family Court, situated at Karimnagar, would be convenient for her to defend the subject O.P. 7. Here, it is apt to refer to the decision of the erstwhile High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad, for the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh, reported in Chejerla Srilakshmi Vs. Chejerla Ramesh Babu, (2018) 4 ALD 162 wherein, the erstwhile common High Court for the States of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh, relying on various decisions of the Hon'ble Apex Court, held as under: "The Apex Court took note of inconvenience being caused to the parties but not the inconvenience to the wife alone, considering the facts and circumstances of the case adverting to the earlier judgment rendered in "Ram Gulam Pandit v. Umesh J. Prasad" and "Rajwinder Kaur v. Balwinder Singh" (as referred in the judgment) and opined that all the authorities are based on the facts of the respective cases and they do not lay down any particular law which operates as a precedent. Thereafter, it noted that taking advantage of the leniency shown to the ladies by this Court, number of transfer petitions are filed by women and, therefore, it is required to consider each petition on merit. Then, the Court dwell upon the fact situation and directed that the husband shall pay all travel and stay expenses to the wife and her companion for each and every occasion whenever she was required to attend the Court. From the aforesaid decision, it is quite vivid that the Court felt that the transfer petitions are to be considered on their own merits and not to be disposed of in a routine manner." 8. From the aforesaid decision, it is quite vivid that the Court felt that the transfer petitions are to be considered on their own merits and not to be disposed of in a routine manner." 8. In the instant case, the grounds putforth by the petitioner/wife for transfer of subject O.P filed by the respondent/husband are that two criminal cases which were filed by her are pending at Karimnagar and as she resides at Kelleda Village, Manakondur Mandal, Karimnagar, it is inconvenient for her to travel from Karimnagar to Ranga Reddy District to attend the proceedings in the Court at Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar. While dealing with similar situations, this Court and the Hon'ble Apex Court were of the opinion that in a petition to transfer a case from one Court to another Court under the provisions of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, it is the inconvenience of both the parties that is to be taken into consideration, but not the inconvenience to the wife alone and that transfer petitions are to be considered on their own merits and not to be disposed of in a routine manner. As far as the facts and circumstances of the instant case are concerned, C.C.No.1116 of 2019 pending on the file of Special Judicial First Class Magistrate, Karimnagar, is registered for the offence under Section 498-A IPC & Sec.4 of D.P.Act; DVC No.49 of 2019 pending on the file of Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Karimnagar, is filed for grant of maintenance and the subject O.P.No.2730 of 2018 pending on the file of the Judge, Family Court, Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar, is filed to declare the marriage as nullity. The reliefs sought for in all these three cases are different and distinct. The points and issues that emerge for determination in all these cases are also quite different. All these cases can be independently disposed of by the Courts concerned having jurisdiction. 9. In the given circumstances of the case, the convenience of the petitioner/wife alone is not a ground to allow her request. There are no justifiable grounds in this transfer petition. The Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is devoid of merits and is liable to be dismissed. 10. In the result, the Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in this Transfer CMP, shall stand closed.