M ANURADHA Vs. J VENKATARAMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two transfer CMPs are filed by the Petitioner- wife under Section 23(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure seeking transfer of O.P. No.5 of 2002 and O.P. No.265 of 2002 filed by the Respondent-husband on the file of the Senior Civil Judge, Sangareddy, Medak District and Additional District Judge, Sangareddy, Medak District respectively, to the file of the Family Court, Bangalore for consideration and disposal. Out of the above two OPs., O.P. No.5 of 2002 is filed for divorce, whereas the other O.P. No.265 of 2002 is filed for the custody of the minor children.

(2.) According to the petitioner, she is working as a Software Engineer in Axes Technologies (India) Private Limited, Koramangala, Bangalore. The petitioner's marriage with the respondent was solemnised as per Hindu rites at Ramachandrapuram, BHEL on 19-12-1992 and during their wedlock two children were born. The respondent is none other than the brother of the petitioner's mother. Though in the petition various allegations were made against the Respondent-husband, they were not pressed into service at the time of hearing. But, it is contended by the learned Counsel that transfer is required for rendering justice in accordance with law. It is the claim of the petitioner that she is a lone female member without any assistance from any male member and it is difficult for her to travel all the way from Bangalore to the place where the present OPs are instituted. Further, the travel would also costs heavily to the petitioner, as the petitioner may be required to attend the Courts on number of occasions. It is also stated that the petitioner is intending to shift her young children to Bangalore, having taken a small accommodation and it would be difficult either to move with such young children very often from Bangalore to Sangareddy and therefore, in order to render justice by providing sufficient opportunity to the petitioner, it would be proper and in the interest of justice, the OPs., have to be transferred to Bangalore to be tried there.

(3.) A detailed counter has been filed on behalf of the Respondent-husband disputing and denying the allegations. In fact, it is stated by the learned Counsel for the respondent that the petitioner had deserted her husband since December, 1997 and has even instituted number of proceedings against the Respondent-husband. It is stated that the petitioner filed O.P. No. 121 of 1998 seeking divorce from the respondent, which was contested by the respondent and the same was dismissed. A criminal case was also filed in C.C. No.l 14 of 2001 under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code, which was also dismissed. The petitioner also filed M.C. No.l of 1999 claiming maintenance against the respondent, which was also dismissed.