IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD TUESDAY, THE TWENTY FIRST DAY OF DECEMBER TWO THOUSAND AND TEN PRESENT THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO TRANSFER CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.574 OF 2010 Between: Pasupati Neelima. --- Petitioner. AND Pasupati Vijaya Raju. --- Respondent. The Court made the following: THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE R. KANTHA RAO TRANSFER CIVIL MISCELLANEOUS PETITION No.574 OF 2010 ORDER: This Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition, under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, is filed by the petitioner seeking transfer of S.M.O.P.No.816 of 2009 on the file of the District Court, Vizianagaram, to try along with O.P. No.1195 of 2010 on the file of the Additional Family Court (Family Court – II), Visakhapatnam. 2. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the respondent. 3. Petitioner is the wife of the respondent. She has been prosecuting her studies (B.D.S) at Chennai. She claims to be a resident of Marripalem, Visakhapatnam city, and seeks transfer of S.M.O.P. No.816 of 2009 on the ground that it is very difficult and causes much inconvenience for her to attend the Court at Vizianagaram. 4. The respondent opposed the petition on the ground that he has been running an educational institution for orphans in the name and style of ‘Grace International Public School’ at Old Duppada, Vizianagaram, for which he is the care taker and his presence is very much required to maintain the said institution, which fact has been admitted by the petitioner in Para No.9 of her affidavit. 5. The petitioner further contended that in fact she is a student pursuing her Bachelor of Dental Surgeon Course (B.D.S.) in Adhiparasakthi Dental College and Hospital, Chennai, and claims that she is residing with her parents at Marripalem, Visakhapatnam city. 6. Admittedly, the petitioner is prosecuting her B.D.S. course in Chennai, and she stated the same in her affidavit also. Visakhapatnam is only at a distance of 60 K.Ms from Vizianagaram and it is not as if she wants to attend the Court at Vizianagaram by staying at Visakhapatnam and as such it is not much difficult for her. It is true that this Court has to take into consideration the convenience of the petitioner-wife in prosecuting the case but when the transfer petition is filed apparently on incorrect grounds, the Court has to necessarily take into account the hardship and inconvenience of both the parties, while disposing of the Transfer petition. In the instant case, admittedly, the respondent has been running an educational institution for orphans at Vizianagaram and as such it will be very difficult for him to attend the Court at Visakhapatnam whereas it will not be difficult for the petitioner to attend the court at Vizianagaram from Visakhapatnam. For the above stated reasons, I am of the view that this Transfer civil miscellaneous petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. ___________________ R. KANTHA RAO, J. Dt.21-12-2010. DSH