KARNATI RAVI Vs. K.V.KAVITHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner-husband has filed this transfer CMP under Sec. 24 of C.P.C. for withdrawal of GWOP.No.14 of 2019 pending on the file of Additional Family Court-cum-Jubilee Hills Car Bomb Blast Court, Hyderabad and to transfer the same to any other Family Court at Hyderabad or to pass any such other orders.

(2.) The petitioner has filed affidavit in support of his claim stating that he has filed I.A.Nos 161, 162, 163 in GWOP.No.14 of 2019 for interim custody of children under Sec. 12 of the Guardianship and Wards Act, 1890. Before the same Court, the respondent has filed MC.No.289 of 2016 and the petitioner was sent to jail twice for non-payment of maintenance amount. Further, the respondent has filed application before the revenue authorities seeking details of the lands owned by the petitioner. Infact, he is only a daily wager, his monthly income is not more than Rs.5,000/-, but the Court below has ordered him to pay maintenance of Rs.8,000.00 per month. Learned Judge, Family Court is insisting the petitioner to pay maintenance amount. The Court is biased in this regard. The Court is not considering his request. Accordingly, requested for withdrawal of GWOP.No.14 of 2019 pending on the file of Additional Family Court-cum- Jubilee Hills Car Bomb Blast Court, Hyderabad to any other Court at Hyderabad and to pass any such other orders.

(3.) The respondent has filed a detailed counter affidavit stating that she has filed MC.No.289 of 2016 on the file of Additional Family Court-cum- Jubilee Hills Car Bomb Blast Court, Hyderabad and an amount of Rs.8,000.00 was ordered on 02.08.2017 to herself and her minor son directing the petitioner to pay the said amount from 18.07.2016 onwards till the disposal of maintenance case. But till date, the petitioner failed to pay any amount. The allegation that the Family Court has denied interim custody of minor child stating that without proceeding to pay the amounts in maintenance case, such request cannot be considered is false. Infact on each and every occasion, the petitioner quarrels with the Presiding Officer of the Court below. Not only he had tried to implicate the petitioner 's counsel in false cases being unsuccessful person, he filed the present petition making all false allegations even against the Presiding Officer of the Courts. There is no need to transfer the GWOP from Additional Family Court at Nampally to any other Court. Accordingly, requested to dismiss the petition.