Wife's Transfer Petition Can Be Allowed If Husband's Offer To Pay Conveyance Charges For Attending Hearings Not Bonafide: Telangana High Court

The Telangana High Court has recently ruled that even if the husband offers to pay the conveyance charges for the wife to appear for the family court hearings, if such an offer seems to have been made without bona fides, it can order for the case to be transferred to the Family Court near the residence of the wife. 

Justice A. Venkateshwara Reddy ruled that although it is settled that a wife can be compensated by the husband by paying conveyance charges, each case depends on its own facts and the principles laid in various precedents are distinguishable from the facts of the present case.

"A close similarity between one case and another case itself is not sufficient to apply the principles laid in the above decisions, more so, in view of the fact that there are no bona fides in the offer made by the husband and it is not his case that he has either paid maintenance or other expenses to his minor child or to his wife at any point of time."

The petitioner filed a plea under Section 24 of CPC for withdrawal and transfer of a petition pending before the Family Court at Hyderabad to Karimnagar and pass any such other orders as this Court deems fit and proper. 

The petitioner being the legally wedded wife of the respondent, led happy marital life for some time and was blessed with a male child. Thereafter, differences arose between them, and she was allegedly driven out of the marital home. Ever since then, she has been living with her parents. Later, the respondent filed a plea before the Hyderabad Family for dissolution of marriage.

The petitioner pointed out that it was quite inconvenient for her to attend the hearings at Hyderabad every time the case was posted along with her minor child since she had to travel 200 km. She accordingly prayed to withdraw the said plea from the file of Family Court, City Civil Court, Hyderabad and to transfer the same to the Family Court at Karimnagar.

In the counter filed by the respondent, it has been argued that the distance between Karimnagar and Hyderabad is only 145 km and that it takes hardly 2.5 hours by public transport. Advocate Deepak Misra appearing for the respondent added that he is ready and willing to pay the conveyance charges to the petitioner to attend the court hearings and that the convenience of wife is not a ground for transfer of matrimonial dispute.

On the other hand, Advocate S. Chalapathi Rao appearing for the petitioner relied on the Supreme Court decisions to argue that in such matrimonial disputes, the convenience of the wife is to be preferred over the convenience of the husband and the wife is entitled for the withdrawal and transfer of the plea pending before Family Court at Hyderabad to Karimnagar where she resides.

The Court noted that the petitioner was not gainfully employed or capable of maintaining herself and their minor son. It is also found that the respondent had not been paying the maintenance either to his wife or to their minor child.

In such facts and circumstances of the case, it was found that since the respondent has not taken any steps ever since the birth of their son either to look after him or to pay any maintenance, his offer that he is willing to pay the conveyance charges to his wife for her appearance before the Family Court at Hyderabad for every hearing has no bona fides and not acceptable.

After giving thoughtful consideration to the principles laid by the Supreme Court that the convenience of wife can be compensated by the husband by paying conveyance charges, the Court observed that each case depends on its own facts and the principles laid in the above decisions are distinguishable from the facts of the present case.

Therefore, it was held that the decisions relied on by the respondent are not helpful to him as there are no bona fides in the offer made by him. Whereas, in view of the principles laid by the Supreme Court, between the convenience of husband and wife, the convenience of wife along with minor child will prevail and it has to be given preference over the convenience of the husband. 

Therefore, the Court found justification in the request of the petitioner for withdrawal of the petition pending on the file of Judge, Family Court at Hyderabad and to transfer the same to the Judge, Family Court at Karimnagar. As a result, the Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition was allowed and the Family Court at Karimnagar was directed to expedite the disposal of the matter, without granting unnecessary adjournments.

The Family Court at City Civil Court, Hyderabad, was directed to transmit the entire records of the case duly indexed within one month.

Case Title: Jonnagaddala Swathi v. L. Karthika Chakravarthy

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Tel) 31 

Click Here To Read/Download The Order