IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH : HYDERABAD MONDAY, THE EIGHTH (8TH) DAY OF NOVEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TEN Present: HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY Transfer Criminal Petition No.116 of 2010 Between: G.R.V.V. Satyanarayana … Petitioner And: S.Asha Rani & another … Respondents HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY Transfer Criminal Petition No.116 of 2010 ORDER: This transfer criminal petition is filed under Section 407(2) Cr.P.C. seeking transfer of MC No.76 of 2009 from the file of Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Nampally, Hyderabad to Additional Family Court, Hyderabad to be tried along with OP No.359 of 2010. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. None appears for the first respondent. Perused the complaint. 3. The petitioner is the husband of the first respondent. The first respondent filed MC No.76 of 2009 on the file of the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Nampally, for maintenance. The petitioner filed OP No.359 of 2010 on the file of the Additional Family Court, Hyderabad for divorce under Section 13(1) of the Hindu Marriage Act. The petitioner seeks transfer of MC No.76 of 2009 also to the file of the Additional Family Court so that the same can be tried and disposed of along with OP No.359 of 2010. 4. It is not disputed that both the Courts are situated at the same place. The petitioner is a resident of Bangalore, whereas the first respondent is residing at Hyderabad. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is put to hardship as he has to attend both the Courts situated at Hyderabad on different dates coming all the way from Bangalore for every adjournment and if both the matters are tried by the same Court, the petitioner’s hardship gets reduced and no prejudice would be caused to the first respondent at the same time. 5. Having regard to the fact that both the matters are between the same parties and the question of fact and law involved in both the matters are similar and inter-related and in view of the fact that the petitioner has to attend the Courts on different dates traveling all the way from Bangalore, it is considered that MC No.76 of 2009 can be transferred to the file of the Additional Family Court, Hyderabad, to be tried along with OP No.359 of 2010. By such joint trial, possibility of conflict of decision can also be avoided and no prejudice would be caused to the first respondent, who is a resident of Hyderabad. 6. In the circumstances, MC No.76 of 2009 on the file of the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Nampally, Hyderabad is ordered to be transferred to the Additional Family Court, Hyderabad, to be tried along with OP No.359 of 2010. 7. In the result, the transfer criminal petition is allowed accordingly. ___________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY, J Date: 08.11.2010 bss