Research › Search › Judgment

Andhra High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 852 (AP)

Kunapareddy Venkateswara Rao v. Kunapareddy Nagamani Kumari

2020-12-22

M.VENKATA RAMANA

body2020
ORDER : M. Venkata Ramana, J. 1. Heard Smt. Kavitha Gottipati, learned counsel for the petitioner, and Sri V. Ch. Naidu, learned counsel for the respondent. 2. The request of the petitioner, who is the husband of the respondent, is to transfer M.C. No. 40 of 2016 now pending on the file of the Court of the learned Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Repalle to the file of the Court of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Chirala to be tried along with O.P. No. 11 of 2016 or to any other Court at Chirala competent to try the above matter. 3. The main ground on which this transfer petition rests is the ill health from which the petitioner is suffering from. It is his version that he has been suffering from certain neurological problem including seizures and therefore he is unable to attend the Court at Repalle, where maintenance case filed by the respondent is pending. At the same time, there is O.P. No. 11 of 2016 pending on the file of the Court of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Chirala for dissolution of marriage filed by him against the respondent. 4. As seen from the case of the respondent, she is living at Battiprolu village of Guntur District along with her child. It is also stated on her behalf that she would find it hard to attend the Court at Chirala if the maintenance case is transferred and thus setting out her personal inconvenience as well as financial difficulty. 5. It is not in dispute that the petitioner is an R.T.C. employee stated to be attached to Depot at Chirala. He is still attending the duties. In such an event, it is rather difficult to accept his version that he cannot attend the Court at Repalle where the maintenance case is pending. When the difficulty being faced on account of the health problems so set out now is not coming in his way to attend his duties in his office, they cannot certainly stand in his way in attending the Court at Repalle. Even otherwise, whenever there is a reason and necessity, he can as well make an application to the concerned Court to dispense with his appearance. 6. Nature of relief sought in this transfer petition is rather difficult to accede. Even otherwise, whenever there is a reason and necessity, he can as well make an application to the concerned Court to dispense with his appearance. 6. Nature of relief sought in this transfer petition is rather difficult to accede. Necessarily a petition under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. should be tried by a competent Court of Judicial Magistrate of First Class. It cannot be tried by the Court of learned Senior Civil Judge. When the request of the petitioner is of such nature, it cannot make out a ground for him in this matter. There is also a rider in the relief sought by the petitioner in the nature of requesting to transfer the above matter to any other Court at Chirala. Nonetheless, in the back drop of circumstances stated above, the request of the petitioner need not be accepted. 7. Therefore, finding no justification to transfer M.C. No. 40 of 2016 now pending on the file of the Court of Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Repalle to any other Court at Chirala, this petition has to be dismissed. 8. In the result, this petition is dismissed. The petitioner is at liberty to apply to the Court of Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Repalle to dispense with his appearance on any date of hearing in case of necessity and any such application filed by the petitioner shall be considered and disposed of by the aforestated Court in accordance with law. No costs. As sequel thereto, pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed. Interim orders, if any, shall stand vacated.