1. The petitioner/wife herein filed the present petition under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short, ‘the C.P.C.’), seeking to transfer H.M.O.P.No.100 of 2025, on the file of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Ramachandrapuram, to the file of the learned V Additional District & Sessions-cum-Family Judge, Visakhapatnam, for trial and disposal.

2. The case of the petitioner, in brief, is as follows:

                  i. The petitioner is the legally wedded wife of the respondent/husband, and their marriage was solemnized on 10.02.2023 at Annavaram, Sri Satyanarayanaswami Varu Devasthanam, in the presence of elders from both sides, as per Hindu customs and rites. Thereafter, due to matrimonial disputes between the parties, the petitioner/wife, along with her minor child, has been residing separately in her parents’ house at Visakhapatnam. The petitioner lodged a complaint on 12.04.2024 on the file of Disha Police Station, Visakhapatnam. The petitioner also filed F.C.O.P.No.1304 of 2025 on the file of the V Additional District & Sessions- cum-Family Judge, Visakhapatnam, seeking maintenance.

                  ii. The petitioner further pleaded that the respondent/husband, in order to cause inconvenience to the petitioner, filed H.M.O.P.No.100 of 2025 on the file of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Ramachandrapuram, and the same is pending for adjudication. The petitioner further pleaded that the distance between Visakhapatnam and Ramachandrapuram is approximately 200 kms and that it is very difficult for the petitioner/wife to appear before the learned Senior Civil Judge, Ramachandrapuram, on each and every adjournment without any male assistance, and that she is constrained to file this petition.

3. Heard the learned counsel on both sides.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that since the petitioner herein is currently residing at Visakhapatnam along with her child aged about one year and is depending upon the mercy of her parents, it is very difficult for the petitioner to appear before the learned Senior Civil Judge, Ramachandrapuram, which is situated at a distance of more than 200 kms, and that H.M.O.P.No.100 of 2025, on the file of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Ramachandrapuram, may be withdrawn and transferred to the file of the Family Court, Visakhapatnam.

5. The respondent herein filed a counter denying the material allegations mentioned in the affidavit of the petitioner and prayed for dismissal of the transfer petition filed by the petitioner.

6. Learned counsel for the respondent would contend that the respondent is a handicapped person suffering from 76% disability and, in proof of the same, a copy of the disability certificate issued by the Government of Andhra Pradesh was filed along with the counter-affidavit. He would further contend that the respondent, being a handicapped person, is unable to travel at a distance of more than two hundred kilometers to attend the Court at Visakhapatnam, if the present transfer petition is allowed and prayed for dismissal of the same.

7. Perused the material available on record.

8. The material on record prima facie shows that the petitioner herein is residing separately in her parents’ house along with her child aged about one year and is depending upon the mercy of her parents. The respondent herein is residing at Biccavolu Village, East Godavari District, and he is working as a Secondary Grade Teacher. As can be seen from the copy of disability certificate, the respondent/husband has been suffering from 76% disability. No doubt, in matrimonial matters, the convenience of the wife has to be taken into consideration rather than the inconvenience of the husband, but in the case at hand, the respondent/husband instituted H.M.O.P.No.100 of 2025, on the file of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Ramachandrapuram, in the month of April, 2025, and the same is pending for adjudication. If the said petition is withdrawn and transferred to the Family Court, Visakhapatnam, the respondent, being a handicapped person with 76% disability, it would be very difficult for him to attend the Court proceedings.

9. Considering the submissions made by both the learned counsel, the petitioner, being resident at Visakhapatnam in her parents’ house along with her child aged about one year, it would be difficult to appear before the learned Senior Civil Judge, Ramachandrapuram, on each and every adjournment. Since H.M.O.P.No.100 of 2025 is filed seeking restitution of conjugal rights by the respondent, there is no need for the petitioner to appear before the said Court on each and every date of adjournments as long as her counsel on record is available and representing the case before the said Court.

10. For the aforesaid reasons, I do not find any grounds to consider the request of the petitioner to transfer H.M.O.P.No.100 of 2025 from the file of the learned Senior Civil Judge, Ramachandrapuram, to the file of the learned V Additional District & Sessions Judge-cum-Family Judge, Visakhapatnam.

11. In the result, this Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is disposed of. The learned Senior Civil Judge, Ramachandrapuram, is hereby directed not to insist upon the personal appearance of the petitioner herein, i.e., the respondent in H.M.O.P.No.100 of 2025, as long as her counsel is attending the Court proceedings and representing the case, except on the day when reconciliation proceedings are being taken up or on the day when her cross- examination is required to be recorded or on any other day when her personal appearance is required, as directed by the learned Senior Civil Judge, Ramachandrapuram. There shall be no order as to costs. As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any pending and the Interim Order granted earlier, if any, shall stand closed.