Allowed

R.Queenteen Adaikala Mary, v. J.Alfred Joseph

Madras HC22 Apr 2015TR CMP(MD)/333/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought transfer of a nullity of marriage interlocutory petition from Cuddalore Sub Court to Trichy Family Court to hear matters jointly, citing travel hardship. Court allowed transfer for convenience of parties.

What did the court decide?

Transfer of I.D.O.P.No.127 of 2014 from Sub Court, Cuddalore to Family Court, Trichy to be tried along with M.C.No.290 of 2014.

R.Queenteen Adaikala Mary, Vs J.Alfred Joseph — Matrimonial and Divorce | Madras HC (2015)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 22.04.2015

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE V.M.VELUMANI

¶5

Tr.C.M.P(MD)No.333 of 2014

¶6

and M.P(MD)No.1 of 2014

¶7

R.Queenteen Adaikala Mary ... Petitioner Vs.

¶8

J.Alfred Joseph ... Respondent

¶9

Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed under Section 24 of Civil Procedure Code to withdraw and transfer I.D.O.P.No.127 of 2014 on the file of the Sub Court, Cuddalore to the Family Court, Trichy.

¶10

For Petitioner : Mr.A.V.Rajasekaran

¶11

For Respondent : Mr.S.Suresh

¶12

ORDER

¶13

The Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed to withdraw I.D.O.P.No.127 of 2014 on the file of the Sub Court, Cuddalore to the Family Court, Trichy.

¶14

The petitioner herein is the wife and the respondent is the husband. The marriage was solemnized between the petitioner and the respondent on 09.02.2014 at St.Mary's Church, Cuddalore as per Christian Rites and Customs.

¶15

3.According to the petitioner, the respondent and his family members tortured the petitioner and therefore, she has came out from matrimonial home and she is living with her parents at Trichy. The respondent filed I.D.O.P.No.127 of 2014 before the Principal Sub Judge, Cuddalore for nullity of marriage.

¶16

The petitioner filed M.C.No.290 of 2014 before the Family Court, Trichy for maintenance. The petitioner has no independent income and she is depending upon her parents even for day to day expenses. She is suffering from back pain. She has to travell more than 4-1/2 hours from Trichy to Cuddalore. The parents of the petitioner also finding it very difficult to accompany her every hearing to go to Cuddalore.

¶17

5.The respondent is running a Private Company at Cuddalore and earning more than Rs.2,00,000/- per month. The respondent and his family members are also economically well settled. The respondent is attending every hearing at Trichy in M.C.No.290 of 2014.

¶18

6.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and for the respondent. The learned counsel for the respondent vehemently opposed https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ the petition for transfer.

¶19

¶20

7.Taking into consideration that the petitioner is unable to travel from Trichy to Cuddalore for attending the case in I.D.O.P.No.127 of 2014 and that the respondent is attending the Family Court, Trichy for every hearing in M.C.No.290 of 2014, this Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is allowed and I.D.O.P.No.127 of 2014 on the file of the Sub Court, Cuddalore is hereby withdrawn and transferred to the file of the Family Court, Trichy to be tried along with M.C.No.290 of 2014 filed by the petitioner, if the same is not yet disposed of. The learned Sub Court, Cuddalore is directed to send the case bundles to the Court of the Family Court, Trichy, immediately. The Registry is also directed to send back the papers that are pending before the Registry. No costs. Consequently, M.P(MD)No.1 of 2014 is closed.

¶21

Sd/-

¶22

Assistant Registrar(Writs)

¶23

/TRUE COPY/

¶24

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶25

¶26

1.The Subordinate Judge,Cuddalore.

¶27

2.The Judge, Family Court, Trichy.

¶28

+1cc to Mr.A.V.Rajasekaran, Advocate, SR.No.21199

¶29

Tr.C.M.P.(MD)No.333 of 2014 22.04.2015

¶30

¶31

PA/11.05.2015/2P/4C

¶32

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

R.Queenteen Adaikala Mary, v. J.Alfred Joseph

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.Queenteen Adaikala Mary, v. J.Alfred Joseph

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

G. Vaidurium Vs M. Devadhasan

Renuga Vs Vijayakumar

Priya Vs T. Saravanan

A.Yasmin, F/22, Vs M.Abdul Rahaman

Mahalakshmi @ Ivanjalin, Vs Raman @ Joseph Raman

N.Pitchai Naicker, Vs S.v.Ingarsoill