Research › Search › Judgment

Andhra High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 1515 (AP)

Shaik Abdul Saleem v. Shaik Shameem

2022-12-27

A.V.RAVINDRA BABU

body2022
JUDGMENT A.V. Ravindra Babu, J. - The Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed by the petitioner, who is the defendant in O.S.No.87 of 2021, on the file of Junior Civil Judge, Podili, with a prayer to transfer the same to the Court of Junior Civil Judge, Narasaraopet or Guntur or Bapatla or Chilakaluripet. 2. The case of the petitioner, in brief, according to the contents of the affidavit enclosed to the petition, is as fallows: (i) His marriage with the respondent was held at Podili on 21.01.2016, according to the Muslim customs and usages. After the marriage, the respondent joined with him at Narasaraopet, which is the matrimonial home. During the wedlock, they were blessed with two male children i.e., Shaik Abrulul Aleem, born on 20.05.2017 at Narasaraopet and Shaik Abdul Nafi, born on 19.11.2018 at KIMS hospital, Ongole. He had any amount of love and affection. But, the respondent left to her matrimonial house along with children without the consent of the petitioner. He did not harass the petitioner. He never had any illegal affairs with any woman. Respondent left from his company with huge cash of Rs.15 lakhs and 40 tulas of gold ornaments along with two male children. The said money was used by the parents of the respondent to construct a house at Podili. Though the respondent gave money and gold to her parents, but the petitioner never asked for any refund. In fact, at request of the respondent, he transferred an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- to his brother-in-law on 31.10.2020. According to Muslim law, the Muslim woman has a separate law under cruelty grounds to claim divorce. Respondent has a huge number of uncles, aunts, cousin brothers and sisters in her native place. Some of the relatives of her are working in the police department. (ii) On 17.08.2022 by abusing law, she foisted a criminal case against him with allegations that he went there and threatened her under Section 498-A, 506 of I.P.C., though he did not go to Podili. The kith and kin of respondent are all harassing him like anything. He has a threat of life, if he attends the Court proceedings at Podili. If he did not attend there, he will lose the case. Hence, the petition. 3. Notice sent by the Registry is served on the respondent, but respondent did not appear. 4. The kith and kin of respondent are all harassing him like anything. He has a threat of life, if he attends the Court proceedings at Podili. If he did not attend there, he will lose the case. Hence, the petition. 3. Notice sent by the Registry is served on the respondent, but respondent did not appear. 4. Now, in deciding the Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition, the point for determination is as to whether O.S.No.87 of 2021, pending on the file of the Junior Civil Judge, Podili is liable to be transferred to the Court of Junior Civil Judge, Narasaraopet, or Guntur or Bapatla or Chilakaluripet as prayed? Point:- 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner would contend in accordance with the averments mentioned in the affidavit enclosed to the petition. 6. Simply because, the respondent did not appear, it does not automatically empower this Court to grant the relief prayed in favour of the petitioner. The cause set up by the petitioner is to be looked into, in view of the facts and circumstances. 7. Admittedly, as evident from the copy of the plaint in O.S.No.87 of 2021, the respondent herein filed the said suit, seeking a declaration to dissolve the marriage. The respondent herein filed the said suit with a bundle of allegations. Now, even according to the petitioner, the children, who were born to the petitioner and respondent out of wedlock, are with the respondent custody at Podili. Admittedly, the proceedings in O.S.No.87 of 2021 are relating to matrimonial relief. 8. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in N.C.V. Aishwarya vs. A.S. Saravana Karthik Sha in Civil Appeal No(s).4894 of 2022 (Arising out of S.L.P.(C) No(s).16465 of 2021) dealing with prayer to grant the proceedings relating to matrimonial relief dealt with at para Nos.9 and 10 as follows: 9. The cardinal principle for exercise of power under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure is that the ends of justice should demand the transfer of the suit, appeal or other proceeding. The cardinal principle for exercise of power under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure is that the ends of justice should demand the transfer of the suit, appeal or other proceeding. In matrimonial matters, wherever Courts are called upon to consider the plea of transfer, the Courts have to take into consideration the economic soundness of both the parties, the social strata of the spouses and their behavioural pattern, their standard of life prior to the marriage and subsequent thereto and the circumstances of both the parties in eking out their livelihood and under whose protective umbrella they are seeking their sustenance to life. Given the prevailing socio-economic paradigm in the Indian society, generally, it is the wife's convenience which must be looked at while considering transfer. 10. Further, when two or more proceedings are pending in different Courts between the same parties which raise common question of fact and law, and when the decisions in the cases are interdependent, it is desirable that they should be tried together by the same judge so as to avoid multiplicity in trial of the same issues and conflict of decisions. 9. Now, the situation is that generally the convenience of the female is to be looked into while disposing a prayer to transfer the cases as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. 10. With regard to the allegations of the petitioner that the respondent left to her parental house along with children with huge cash and gold, etc., the same cannot be decided in this application, especially, when the copy of the plaint in O.S.No.87 of 2021 throws allegations against the present petitioner. Now, absolutely, the thing which prompted the petitioner to file this petition appears to be the registration of the F.I.R. in Crime No.188 of 2022 against him at the instance of the respondent under Sections 498-A and 506 of I.P.C. The ground on which the petitioner approached this Court is that as the plaintiff in O.S.No.87 of 2021 has huge relatives in the form of uncles, aunts, cousin sisters and brothers, he has every life threat, if he attends the Court proceedings there. The allegation of the petitioner that some of the nearest relatives are working in the police department is bereft of necessary details. The allegation of the petitioner that some of the nearest relatives are working in the police department is bereft of necessary details. So, it cannot be held that the registration of F.I.R. in Crime No.188 of 2022 is on account of the influence made by the so-called relatives who are working in the police department. If really the petitioner has a life threat, he has to quote instance or examples when he has faced such a threat and when he was threatened with dire consequences, etc. So, it appears that the petitioner filed this application on mere apprehension without any basis whatsoever and basing on the grounds pleaded, he miserably failed to make out a case to get the relief of transfer under Section 24 of the Cr.P.C. Hence, I see no reason to grant the relief prayed. 11. In the result, the Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.