HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA TR.C.M.P.No. 604 OF 2010 DATED 21ST NOVEMBER, 2011. BETWEEN Smt. Kondapalli (Pemmaraju) Maruthi Sridivya …….Petitioner and Miss. Kalpika Ganeshan …… Respondent HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA TR.C.M.P.No. 604 OF 2010 ORDER: This Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition under section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure is ﬁled seeking to transfer the suit in O.S.No. 1167 of 2010 pending on the ﬁle of the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District, at L.B. Nagar to any competent Court at Kakinada. Heard. Perused the case file. It is the case of the petitioner that her husband having developed intimacy with the respondent, himself and his relatives are harassing her. It is her further case that her husband and his paternal relatives are forcing her to bring additional dowry. Having not been in a position to bear their harassment, she ﬁled a private complaint against the respondent, her husband and her paternal relatives before the III Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kakinada, East Godavari, which was referred to the Police for investigation and the same was registered as Crime No. 40 of 2010. The petitioner also ﬁled a case seeking maintenance before the learned Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Kakinada in M.C.No. 25 of 2009 and the same is pending consideration. While so, it is stated that to counter blast the above cases, the respondent herein ﬁled a suit in O.S.No. 1167 of 2010 before the learned Senior Civil Judge, Ranga Reddy District at LB Nagar under Section 19 read with Order VII Rule 8 CPC for defamation. It is the complaint of the petitioner that as the respondent and her husband are staying at Hyderabad, there is a threat to her life at the time when she attends the Court at Hyderabad in connection with the said suit and further she being a lady it is diﬃcult for her to travel all the way from Kakinada to Hyderabad to attend each and every hearing of the aforesaid suit. She therefore sought transfer of the said suit to any competent Court at Kakinada. On the other hand, it is the case of the respondent that the petitioner and her husband having disputes between them, had implicated her in the crime with a mala ﬁde intention. It is her further case that the petitioner and her relatives created nuisance at her work place and residence causing embarrassment to her. It is stated that she is working in a private company and also as a part-time ﬁlm artist, and therefore it would be diﬃcult for her to go to Kakinada to attend the Court in case the suit ﬁled by her is transferred to the Court at Kakinada. It is relevant to note that although the discretionary power of transfer of cases cannot be imprisoned within a straightjacket of any cast-iron formula unanimously applicable to all situations, it cannot be gainsaid that the power to transfer a case must be exercised within due care, caution and circumspection. In the case on hand, it is to be seen that both the petitioner and respondent are females. While the respondent is working at Hyderabad, the petitioner is a house wife/unemployed. In respect of transfer of proceedings, normally the convenience of the working women (respondent herein) is to be preferred over the convenience of other party who in this case happens to be a housewife (petitioner herein). In the light of the above, the circumstances stated by the petitioner in the aﬃdavit ﬁled in support of this petition do not ﬁnd merit consideration for the transfer of the proceedings as prayed for. I do not see any merit in the petition, which is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. --------------------------------------------- JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA Dated 21ST NOVEMBER, 2011. Msnro