SYNOPSIS

The Petitioner-wife preferring the present Transfer Petition for

transferring M.C. No. 233/2020 (titled as Myla Naveen Joseph Vs Smt.

Divya) filed under Sec 10 (VII) R/W Sec 14 of Indian Divorce Act 1869

for divorce by the Respondent-husband before the Hon’ble Family

Court Hubballi, Karnataka to the Hon’ble ????? , Wanaparthy,

Telangana.

The transfer Petition is filed on the following counts:

1. That the Petitioner is living at Kothakota, Wanaparthy,

Telangana without any sufficient means under the mercy of her

aged parents. She would be unable to travel up and down

without any male help from Kothakota, Wanaparthy, Telangana

to Hubballi, Karnataka to pursue the M.C. No. 223/2020 under

Section 10 (VII) R/W Sec 14 of Indian Divorce Act 1869 for

divorce. It is the Petitioner’s convenience that, therefore, must be

looked at. That there is no direct transportation to travel from

Kothakota, Wanaparthy to Hubballi, Karnataka.

2. That there is no hardship is cause to the Respondent as he has

to attend the cases filed by the Petitioner under Section 498-A of

IPC and DVC Act, if the M.C. No. 223 of 2020 for divorce pending

before Hon’ble Family Court Hubballi, Karnataka is transferred

 to Hon’ble ??????????? Wanaparthy, Telangana in considering

the Petitioners convenience in the current situation of Covid-19.

3. That with bad intention, and in anticipation that Petitioner may

take legal action against the Respondent, the Respondent had

filed M.C. No. 223 of 2020 for divorce before the Hon’ble Family

Court Hubballi, Karnataka only to compel the Petitioner to reach

to one sided settlement by unfair tactics.

4. That the Respondent filed M.C. No. 223 of 2020 before Hon’ble

Family Court Hubballi, Karnataka for divorce only to get

additional dowry by harassing the Petitioner.

5. That most of the witnesses in M.C. No. 223 of 2020 before

Hon’ble Family Court Hubballi, Karnataka for divorce are from

Kothakota, Wanaparthy, Telangana, it will be difficult for them to

travel to Hubballi, Karnataka from Kothakota, Wanaparthy,

Telangana.

6. For that the Petitioner is afraid that her personal safety is in

danger as the Respondent is an influential person and more over

financially sound person and capable of doing anything. It is

pertinent to mention here that the Respondent and his family

members used to abuse and harass the Petitioner mentally and

physically and used to make the Petitioner live like a slave in the

matrimonial house and all these incidents made the Petitioner

suffer a lot of mental trauma, isolation and depression.

Hence the present Transfer Petition.

LISTS OF DATES

17.08.2018 The Engagement ceremony was performed on

17.08.2018 at Giddaluru. On the demand of the

Respondent’s family, Petitioner’s father agreed

to give an amount of Rs. 7,00,000/- and 4 tolas

gold articles as dowry.

20.02.2019 That the mother of the Petitioner suffered from

heart attack, after which she was immediately

admitted in MaxCure Hospital, Secretariat,

Hyderabad on 20.02.2019, doctors took her for

surgery which resulted into two stents in her

heart, where she was treated for 5 days.

This is due to the mental tension which was

created by the Respondents family that, all of a

sudden Respondent wanted to cancel the

marriage with the Petitioner on the reason that

there was a serious delay in giving the dowry.

Due to the Respondent’s harassment the entire

 family went into depression regarding their

daughter’s marriage with the Respondent and

these circumstances resulted in the Petitioner’s

mother suffering from hearth attack. A copy of

discharged summary dated 25.02.2019 is

annexed herewith and marked as ANNEXURE

P-1 [Page]

16.04.2019 The parents of the Petitioner keeping the future

of their daughter in the hands of Respondent

and that the engagement ceremony was

performed, as per the demand of Respondents

family, out of Rs. 7,00,000/-, Rs. 5,00,000/-,

were deposited in the account of the

Respondent vide in account No. 10467147427

on 16.04.2019 by the father of the Petitioner

and agreed to transfer the remaining Rs.

2,00,000/- and 4 tolas gold on the day of

marriage. A copy of Deposit/ Pay Slip, SBI,

Kothakota, dated 16.04.2019 is annexed

herewith and marked as ANNEXURE P-2 [Page]

03.05.2019 The Marriage between the Petitioner and the

Respondent was solemnized on 03.05.2019 at

 St. Peter’s Church Hubbali of Karnataka state

as per the customs prevailing in their

community. As per their demand the remaining

amount Rs. 2,00,000/- and 4 tolas of gold was

given to the Respondent on the same date. A

copy of photos receiving remaining dowry by the

Petitioner, dated 03.05.2019 is annexed

herewith and marked as ANNEXURE P-3 [Page]

06.05.2019 It is submitted that the reception ceremony of

the Respondent and the Petitioner was held at

Giddaluru town of Andhra Pradesh which is the

native place for both of them. After which she

stayed there for 3 days for completing other

ceremonies by discharging her duties as wife.

After the marriage Petitioner and Respondent

used to live with the rest of the family including

her married brother-in-law, and unmarried

brother-in-law sharing a single roof.

Immediately the Respondent sent the Petitioner

to her parent’s village with a reason that there

is no room to accommodate the Petitioner

because they all were sharing a single roof. A

 copy of photos pertaining to the marriage

ceremony, dated 06.05.2019 is annexed

herewith and marked as ANNEXURE P-4 [Page]

27.06.2019 It is submitted that within the time period of 50

days, Petitioner has repeatedly called the

Respondent to take her with him but the

Respondent concluded to the Petitioner that to

come along with her parents. As that Petitioner

and her parents travelled to the Respondent

place, after their arrival Respondent on the

instigation of his family members started

demanding them for additional dowry and gold.

Petitioner’s parents expressed their inability to

give additional dowry and convinced the

Respondent to take care of their daughter.

Immediately after the return of Petitioner’s

parents to Kothakota, Respondent started

harassing the Petitioner with his unlawful

demands along with his family members.

18.07.2019 In the aforesaid circumstances, Petitioner

celebrated the birthday of the Respondent at

Hubballi. A copy of birthday celebration photos,

 dated 18.07.2019 is annexed herewith and

marked as ANNEXURE P-5 [Page]

August, 2019 It is submitted that Petitioner has not only

suffered harassment but also could not tolerate

the obscene behaviour from the friends of

Respondent and his family members, finally in

the month of August 2019 Respondent necked

out the Petitioner because of his unsatisfied

greed for extra dowry. It is pertinent to submit

that Respondent mercilessly necked out the

Petitioner even though she was suffering from

Typhoid fever.

25.08.2019 Few days later Petitioner along with her mother

approached the Respondent but the

Respondent and his family denied Petitioner to

enter into their house and threatened the

Petitioner and his mother by provoking a

drunkard person to attack her. Petitioner’s

parents had tried several times to leave their

daughter in Respondent company but he denied

the Petitioner.
23.01.2020 In those circumstances with the bad intention

Respondent issued notice for mutual judicial

divorce with false allegations. A copy of legal

notice for mutual judicial divorce, dated

23.01.2020 is annexed herewith and marked as

ANNEXURE P-6 [Page]

03.02.2020 It is to further submit that after receiving the

notice sent by the Respondent, Petitioner has

responded to the notice in a formal way. A copy

of reply notice, dated 03.02.2020 is annexed

herewith and marked as ANNEXURE P-7 [Page]

07.09.2020 It is submitted that Petitioner along with her

family members once again approached the

Respondent on 07.09.2020 to join with his

company but in this final trial Respondent did

not agree to accept her back. Petitioner is still

having so much of love and affection towards

the Respondent and Petitioner is intending to

lead a happy marital life with the Respondent.

18.09.2020 It is submitted that Petitioner after replying to

the notice in a formal way dated 03.02.2020,

once again with a fond hope issued a legal

 notice calling the Respondent to accept and

take her back within 07 days of this legal

notice, otherwise the Respondent and his family

will be liable for legal action which will be taken

by the Petitioner. A copy of legal notice, dated

18.09.2020 is annexed herewith and marked as

ANNEXURE P-8 [Page]

24.09.2020 Even after the legal notice issued by the

Petitioner to accept her back, the Respondent in

anticipation that the Petitioner may take legal

action against the Respondent, the Respondent

filed M.C. No. 223/2020 before the court of

Hon’ble family court Hubballi, Karnataka under

Section 10 (VII) R/W Sec 14 of Indian Divorce

Act 1869 for divorce. A copy of M.C. No. 223 of

2020, dated 24.09.2020 is annexed herewith

and marked as ANNEXURE P-9 [Page]

30.09.2020 It is submitted that Respondent replied to the

legal notice sent by the Petitioner on

24.09.2020 stating that Respondent denied all

the averments mentioned in the legal notice

and stated that the Respondent has already

 filed M.C. No. 223/2020 in the Hon’ble Family

Court Hubballi (Karnataka) for dissolution of

the marriage held between Petitioner and

Respondent. A copy of reply notice, dated

30.09.2020 is annexed herewith and marked as

ANNEXURE P-10 [Page]

19.10.2020 Having no option, the Petitioner filed DVC vide

D.V.C. No. 15 of 2020 before the Court of

Hon’ble Judicial Magistrate Of First Class At

Wanaparthy praying that-

(A) To direct ?????????

?????????????

10.02.2021 It is submitted that Petitioner has filed the

written statement in the M.C. No. 223/2020 by

denying all the averments. A copy of written

statement (Objections), dated 10.02.2021 is

annexed herewith and marked as ANNEXURE

P-11 [Page]

17.02.2021 After this Petitioner filed a police compliant

against the Respondent and his family

members in Kothakota Police Station, District:

 Wanaparthy vide FIR No. 52 of 2021 under

Section 489- A IPC, Section 3,4 Dowry

Prohibition Act. A copy of FIR vide 52 of 2021,

dated 17.02.2021 is annexed herewith and

marked as ANNEXURE P-12 [Page]

(Lists of date in DVC written statement is

missing)

GROUNDS

A. For that the Petitioner is living at Kothakota, Wanaprathy

Telangana without any sufficient means under the mercy of her

aged parents who are suffering with major ailments. She would

be unable to travel up and down without any male help from

Kothakota, Wanaparthy, Telangana to Hubballi, Karnataka to

pursue the M.C. No. 223/2020 under Section 10 (VII) R/W Sec

14 of Indian Divorce Act 1869 for divorce. It is the Petitioner’s

convenience that, therefore, must be looked at.

B. For that there is no hardship is caused to the Respondent as he

has to attend the cases filed by the Petitioner under Section 498-

A of IPC and DVC Act, if the M.C. No. 223 of 2020 pending

before Hon’ble Family Court Hubballi, Karnataka for divorce is

transferred to Hon’ble ??????????? Wanaparthy, Telangana in

considering the Petitioners convenience in the current situation

of Covid-19.

C. For that with bad intention, and in anticipation that Petitioner

may take legal against the Respondent, the Respondent had filed

M.C. No. 223 of 2020 before the Hon’ble Family Court Hubballi,

Karnataka for divorce only to compel the Petitioner to reach to a

one- sided settlement by unfair tactics.

D. That the Respondent sent Petitioner to Kothakota from Hubballi

only to harass her for bringing extra dowry by the way of filing

M.C. no. 223 of 2020 before the Hon’ble Family Court Hubballi,

Karnataka for divorce.

E. For that the Hon’ble Family Court Hubballi, Karnataka is at

distance around 450 Kms from Kothakota, Wanaprathy,

Telangana. The Respondent and his family members are

influential and financially sound people and they want to take

advantage of this fact and considering the distance and no

regular train and bus connectivity.

F. For that the Respondent is Central Government employee works

in Railway department and he earns near about Rs. 60,000/-

per month, and he has a house situated at Hubballi. Whereas

the Petitioner is totally depending on her aged parents since her

livelihood.

G. For that most of the witnesses in M.C. No. 223 of 2020 before

the Hon’ble Family Court Hubballi, Karnataka for divorce are

from Kothakota, Wanaprathy, Telangana, it will be difficult for

them to travel to Hubballi in Karnataka from Kothakota,

Wanaprathy, Telangana.

H. For that the Petitioner being a woman, it is inconvenient and

unsafe in this circumstance of the case to travel such a long

distance by hiring vehicles and stay overnight in Hubballi,

Karnataka to attend the case on every date of hearing at Hon’ble

Family Court Hubballi, Karnataka, as there are continuous

threats from the Respondent and his associates at Hubballi,

Karnataka.

I. For that the Petitioner is afraid that her personal safety is in

danger as the Respondent is an influential person and more over

financially sound person and capable of doing anything. It is

pertinent to mention here that the Respondent and his family

members used to abuse and harass the Petitioner mentally by

communicating through mobile phone by asking extra dowry

and all these incidents made the Petitioner suffer a lot of mental

trauma, isolation and depression.

A. For that the Respondent in his legal notice dated 23.01.2020

which he has sent stating that “my client (Respondent) has

married with you (Petitioner) by incurring all the marriage

expenses”, when the Respondent came to know about the Rs.

5,00,000/- transaction dated 16.04.2019 and he changed his

version in M.C. No. 223/2020 filed for divorce by modifying

the facts from the legal notice sent by the Respondent and it

is mentioned as “by incurring the spectacular marriage

expenses equally with the Petitioner family” in M.C. No. 223/

2020.

B. For that Petitioner cannot communicate in Kannada

Language where the present M.C. No. 223 of 2020

proceedings are going.

C. For that of extra dowry, the Respondent and his family is

harassing the Petitioner and due to which the life of Petitioner

is destroyed.