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 withdrawal of O.P.No.147 of 2025, on the file of learned VIII Additional District and Sessions Judge-cum-Special Court for trial of offence against Women, Rajamahendravaram and to transfer the same to the Court of the learned Judge, Family Court, Srikakulam District, 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 20.12.2016 at Godi Samyual Church, Srikakulam, in the presence of elders as per the Christian Customs. Thereafter, due to matrimonial disputes between the parties, the petitioner/wife has been residing separately in her mother‟s house along with her two children at Srikakulam. The petitioner further pleaded that she lodged a report and the same is registered as Crime No.06 of 2019, on the file of Women Police Station, Srikakulam under Section 498-A of IPC and Section 3 & 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act and the same is numbered as Charge Sheet No.430 of 2019, on the file of Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Srikakulam and the same was dismissed.

                  ii. The petitioner/wife further pleaded that, with a view to cause inconvenience to her, the respondent/husband filed a divorce petition vide O.P.No.147 of 2025, on the file of learned VIII Additional District and Sessions Judge-cum-Special Court for trial of offence against Women, Rajamahendravaram, under Section 10 (I) (X) of Indian Divorce Act, 1869, for dissolution of marriage, and the same is also pending for adjudication.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would further contend that the petitioner, being a woman, has been residing at her mother‟s house along with her two children at Srikakulam and is depending upon the mercy of her mother, and the distance between Srikakulam and Rajamahendravaram is approximately 300 kms, and it is very difficult for her to travel to attend the case proceedings filed by the respondent/husband before the Court at Rajamahendravaram without any male assistance, and that she was constrained to file the present petition against the respondent/husband, seeking withdrawal of O.P. No.147 of 2025, on the file of the learned VIII Additional District and Sessions Judge- cum-Special Court for trial of offences against Women, Rajamahendravaram, and transfer the same to the file of the learned Judge, Family Court, Srikakulam, for trial and disposal.

4. Respondent filed a counter denying the material allegations pleaded in the affidavit of petitioner and he prayed for dismissal of the transfer petition filed by the petitioner.

5. Learned counsel for the respondent would contend that the respondent herein is working as an Assistant Executive Engineer, APTRANSCO, Rajamahendravaram, in case, if the case has been transferred to Srikakulam from Rajamahendravaram, it is very difficult for him to obtain leave and travel to Srikakulam on each and every adjournment to appear before the learned Judge, Family Court, Srikakulam. He further pleaded that there are no merits in the transfer petition filed by the petitioner and that the petition may be dismissed. He further pleaded that the case filed by the petitioner against the respondent in Charge Sheet No.430 of 2019, on the file of the Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Srikakulam, under Section 498-A of IPC and Sections 3 & 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, ended in acquittal of the respondent and no other cases are pending between both the parties at Srikakulam.

6. Heard learned counsel appearing on both sides.

7. Perused the material available on record.

8. The material on record prima facie goes to show that, due to the matrimonial disputes between both parties, the petitioner/wife has been residing with her mother along with her two children at Srikakulam. Both the petitioner as well as the respondent are educated persons, where the petitioner has completed her MBBS course and the respondent is working as an Assistant Executive Engineer, APTRANSCO, Rajamahendravaram.

9. The material on record further reveals that the respondent/husband has instituted a petition against the petitioner/wife herein vide O.P. No.147 of 2025, on the file of the learned VIII Additional District and Sessions Judge-cum-Special Court for trial of offences against Women, Rajamahendravaram, seeking dissolution of marriage, and the same is pending for adjudication, wherein the petitioner, engaged a counsel, and also filed a counter, the O.P. is coming up for recording of evidence.

10. The learned counsel for the petitioner would contend that in matrimonial cases, the convenience of the wife has to be taken into consideration rather than the inconvenience of the husband. In the case at hand, the respondent herein instituted a case vide O.P.No.147 of 2025 at Rajamahendravaram.

11. The Hon‟ble Apex Court in Krishnaveni Nagam/Petitioner v. Harish Nagam/Respondent(2017(3)ALD151(SC)) in Transfer Petition (Civil) No.1912 of 2014 held as follows:-

                  “One cannot ignore the problem faced by a husband if proceedings are transfer on account of genuine difficulties faced by the wife. The husband may find it difficult to contest the proceedings at a place which is convenient to the wife. Thus, transfer is not always a solution acceptable to both the parties.”

12. In a case of Anindita Das v. Srijit Das(2006(9)SCC197), the Apex Court observed that normally court has been accepting the prayer of transfer of matrimonial case made while showing leniency towards women, in some cases that leniency was being misused by women, hence each and every case has to be considered on its own merits

13. The petitioner herein made an appearance through her counsel; the counter has also been filed, the pleadings have been completed, and the case vide O.P.No.147 of 2025 is at the stage of recording evidence. At this stage, if the said case is transferred to the Court at Srikakulam, it will be further delayed. Moreover, in the petition filed by the respondent seeking divorce, the appearance of the petitioner/wife on each and every adjournment is not at all required, since she has engaged a counsel on record before the learned VIII Additional District and Sessions Judge-cum- Special Court for trial of offences against Women, Rajamahendravaram. Therefore, I am not inclined to consider the request of the petitioner to transfer O.P. No.147 of 2025, on the file of the learned VIII Additional District and Sessions Judge-cum-Special Court for trial of offences against Women, Rajamahendravaram.

14. Considering the facts and circumstances as stated supra, instead of transferring the case from Rajamahendravaram to Srikakulam, the personal appearance of the petitioner herein i.e., respondent in O.P.No.147 of 2025 has been dispensed with before the learned VIII Additional District and Sessions Judge-cum-Special Court for trial of offences against Women, Rajamahendravaram, will sub-serve the cause of justice. Both the learned counsel on record represented that certain time limit may be fixed on the Court of learned VIII Additional District and Sessions Judge-cum-Special Court for trial of offences against Women, Rajamahendravaram, to dispose of O.P. No.147 of 2025 as expeditiously as possible.

15. In view of the foregoing discussion, this Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is disposed of with the following observations:

                  i. The learned VIII Additional District and Sessions Judge-cum- Special Court for trial of offence against Women, Rajamahendravaram is hereby directed not to insist for the personal appearance of the petitioner herein i.e., the respondent in O.P.No.147 of 2025, as long as her counsel on record is attending the Court proceedings and representing the case except 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 VIII Additional District and Sessions Judge-cum-Special Court for trial of offence against Women, Rajamahendravaram.

                  ii. The learned VIII Additional District and Sessions Judge-cum- Special Court for trial of offence against Women, Rajamahendravaram is directed to dispose of the O.P.No.147 of 2025 on merits within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of the copy of the order. 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.