Telangana HC Allows the Withdrawal of the Petition From Civil Judge to Family Court

Must Read

Himachal Pradesh High Court Supports Promotion Based on Seniority of Post Rather Based on the Eligibility Test

In the case of Ramesh Chand Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Others, the petitioner, reached the court as...

NCDRC Dismisses PIL against Urologist, Holy Family Hospital, Says Mode Of Treatment Or Skill Differs From Doctor To Doctor

The National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission (NCDRC) dismissed a petition against Holy Family Hospital and a Urologist, alleging negligence...

Himachal Pradesh High Court Disposes Suit for Possession and Permanent Prohibitory Injunction Due To Mutual Consent

In the case of Parveen Kumar vs Smt. Vijay Laxmi and Ors, the Petitioner, Parveen had filed a suit for declaration,...

Supreme Court Appoints Committee To Examine Arbitrariness of Sealing of Resorts in Elephant Corridor, Tamil Nadu

A Full Bench headed by the Chief Justice of India, in the matter of Hospitality Association of Mudumalai V. In...

Madhya Pradesh High Court Rules That Export Ban on N95 Masks & PPE Kits Does Not Violate Fundamental Right of Traders

The Madhya Pradesh High Court held that the formulation and regulation of trade policies were within the subjects of...

Delhi High Court Issues Notice To Two Pleas Filed Praying for Recognition of Same-Sex Marriage

The Court heard two writ petitions which urged that the Special Marriage Act and the Foreign Marriage Act be...

Follow us

The Telangana High Court gave its order on Smt. Chenagala Harathi v. Sri Chengala Satyaiah on 1 June 2020. It directed the withdrawal of petition from the file of a Senior Civil Judge. Consequently, the court directed its transfer to the file of a Family Court Judge in Ranga Reddy District, L.B. Nagar. 

Brief of the Facts

A husband and wife are the respondent and petitioner respectively in this case. They performed their marriage on 06.05.2001. This took place at Rajendranagar, Ranga Reddy District. The husband filed for a divorce before the Senior Civil Judge, at Mahaboobnagar. He filed it under Section 13(1)(ia)(ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. However, his wife stays at Rajendranagar.

In this case, the petitioner prayed to withdraw the case from the file of the Senior Civil Judge. She prayed to transfer the same to the file of Judge of the Family Court at Ranga Reddy District in L.B.Nagar. This was to ease her process of attaining justice. 

The Contention of the Petitioner   

The counsel for the petitioner contends that the respondent has filed a divorce petition with the Senior Civil Judge at Mahaboobnagar. However, the petitioner stays in Rajendranagar, Ranga Reddy District. They have had three children who are aged 16, 13 and 11 years, who currently reside with their mother.

The distance between Rajendranagar and Mahaboobnagar is about 120 kilometres. Accordingly, she submitted that it is difficult for her to reach the court in Mahaboobnagar. Therefore, she sought to withdraw the petition from the file of Senior Civil Judge at Mahaboobnagar. The learned counsel further contended that the petitioner seeks to transfer her petition. The transfer would be to the file of Judge, Family Court at Ranga Reddy District at L.B.Nagar. This arrangement would be much more convenient for her. 

The Contention of the Respondent 

The learned counsel for the respondent contended that the petitioner mentally-harassed the respondent. Annoyed with the petitioner, the respondent filed the divorce petition. In addition to this, the respondent claimed that granting relief to the petitioner should not take place. There is an absence of any justifiable grounds. Therefore, any ground to transfer the petition to another court does not arise. 

Observation of the Court 

The Court observed that the petitioner has three minor children, who are now pursuing their studies. She has to travel from Rajendra Nagar to Mahaboobnagar to attend the proceedings. As a result, the petitioner has to either travel along with the minor children or leave them at home. In both circumstances, it causes trouble and hardship to her.

In light of this, the Court interpreted the amended Section 19(iii)(a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. This Section gives special preference to the wife to file a petition and prosecute the same. She can file it before the Court within whose jurisdiction she resides. The petitioner/wife is residing at Rajendranagar. Hence, the Court finds that the reason is strong enough for granting the relief claimed by her in this case. The purpose of this was for trial and disposal.

The Decision of the Court

The Court allowed the transfer of Civil Miscellaneous Petition. 


Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgements from the court. Follow us on Google News, InstagramLinkedInFacebook & Twitter. You can also subscribe for our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.

Latest News

Himachal Pradesh High Court Supports Promotion Based on Seniority of Post Rather Based on the Eligibility Test

In the case of Ramesh Chand Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Others, the petitioner, reached the court as he was aggrieved by the...

NCDRC Dismisses PIL against Urologist, Holy Family Hospital, Says Mode Of Treatment Or Skill Differs From Doctor To Doctor

The National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission (NCDRC) dismissed a petition against Holy Family Hospital and a Urologist, alleging negligence in diagnosing the septicemia and...

Himachal Pradesh High Court Disposes Suit for Possession and Permanent Prohibitory Injunction Due To Mutual Consent

In the case of Parveen Kumar vs Smt. Vijay Laxmi and Ors, the Petitioner, Parveen had filed a suit for declaration, possession and a permanent prohibitory...

Supreme Court Appoints Committee To Examine Arbitrariness of Sealing of Resorts in Elephant Corridor, Tamil Nadu

A Full Bench headed by the Chief Justice of India, in the matter of Hospitality Association of Mudumalai V. In Defence of Environment and Animals...

Madhya Pradesh High Court Rules That Export Ban on N95 Masks & PPE Kits Does Not Violate Fundamental Right of Traders

The Madhya Pradesh High Court held that the formulation and regulation of trade policies were within the subjects of the Central Government. Any reasonable...

Delhi High Court Issues Notice To Two Pleas Filed Praying for Recognition of Same-Sex Marriage

The Court heard two writ petitions which urged that the Special Marriage Act and the Foreign Marriage Act be interpreted to also apply to...

Supreme Court Allows Appeal Challenging Allahabad High Court Order Granting Interim Bail on Medical Grounds

An appeal was filed before the Supreme Court, challenging the Judgment & Order of the Allahabad High Court in the matter of State of U.P...

Bombay High Court Allows Petition Seeking Lawyers and Legal Clerks To Travel in Local Trains

The present hearing arose out of a batch of Public Interest Litigations that was filed in the Bombay High Court to permit the members...

Provisions for Retirement of Teachers Must Be Read With the Larger Interest of Students in Mind: Supreme Court

Supreme Court in Navin Chandra Dhoundiyal v State of Uttarakhand reinstated the appellants to their position as Professor on basis of re-employment till the...

Parties Cannot Deny Specific Performance Merely Due To Delay: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court, in Ferrodous Estate v P Gopirathnam, revisited the law on the specific performance of a contract. It reiterated that mere delay...

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -