The Supreme Court of India, on September 12, 2022, delivered a crucial judgment in the case of Raghumudri Navya vs Padala Santosh Kumar, focusing on the transfer of jurisdiction in a family court matter. The petitioner, Raghumudri Navya, sought the transfer of a case titled “Padala Santosh Kumar vs. Smt. Raghumudri Navya” from Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh to Hyderabad, Telangana.
Background:
The original case (O.P. No. 1143/2021) was pending before the Court of Additional Family Judge at Visakhapatnam. The nature of the dispute in the original petition is not detailed in the summary provided. However, the transfer petition indicates a request for a change in the venue of the legal proceedings for reasons not specified in the summary.
Legal Proceedings and Decision:
- Hearing of the Case: The Supreme Court, after hearing the counsel for the petitioner, made its decision. Notably, no one appeared for the respondent, Padala Santosh Kumar, during the hearing.
- Judicial Consideration: The Court took into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, which are not elaborated in the summary but were evidently persuasive enough for the Court to decide in favor of the transfer.
- Transfer of the Case: The Court directed the transfer of the case to the Court of XV Additional District Judge cum II Additional Family Court, located at Kukatpally, Hyderabad, Telangana.
- Directive to the Transferor Court: The Court ordered the transferor court in Visakhapatnam to immediately transmit the entire record related to the case to the transferee court in Hyderabad.
- Order and Proceedings Record: The order was passed by a bench comprising Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice Abhay S. Oka.
Implications:
This judgment is significant as it demonstrates the Supreme Court’s power to transfer cases between jurisdictions in response to petitions for the same. The decision underscores the importance of convenience and fairness in legal proceedings, especially in family law matters. It also reflects the court’s willingness to accommodate the logistical and personal challenges faced by litigants.
Conclusion: The decision in the case of Raghumudri Navya vs Padala Santosh Kumar highlights the judicial system’s flexibility in addressing the needs of litigants in family court proceedings. It sets an important precedent for the transfer of cases between jurisdictions, ensuring that legal proceedings are conducted in the most appropriate and convenient forum for all parties involved.