Allowed

A.Alagammal v. S.Saravanan

Madras HC28 Jul 2017TR CMP/422/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner filed a transfer petition under Section 24 CPC to withdraw matrimonial proceedings from Principal Sub Court, Trichy and transfer them to Family Court, Chennai due to work constraints and physical inconvenience. Respondent did not appear. Court found no suspicion of bonafides, allowed transfer.

What did the court decide?

Proceedings in H.M.O.P No. 110 of 2017 withdrawn from Principal Sub Court, Trichy and transferred to Principal Family Court, Chennai.

A.Alagammal Vs S.Saravanan — Matrimonial and Divorce | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED:28.07.2017

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.GOVINDARAJ

¶6

TR CMP NO.422 of 2017
AND CMP NO.8765 of 2017
A.Alagammai ... Petitioner
versus
S.Saravanan ... Respondent

¶7

PRAYER : Petition filed under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure to withdraw the H.M.O.P No. 110 of 2017 now pending before the Principal Sub Judge, Trichy by withdrawing from the said court and to transfer the same to Family Court, Chennai.

¶8

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Balachandar For Respondent : No appearance O R D E R

¶9

The petitioner has filed this transfer petition with a prayer

¶10

to withdraw the proceedings in H.M.O.P No. 110 of 2017 from the file of http://www.judis.nic.in Principal Sub Court, Trichy and transfer the same to the file of Family

¶11

¶12

Court, Chennai.

¶13

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. Even

¶14

though the respondent was served, none appeared on behalf of the respondent.

¶15

The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that

¶16

she is working as an Assistant Professor at SIET College, Chennai and therefore, it is very difficult for her to avail leave for defending the proceedings before the Principal Sub Court, Trichy and hence, she seeks

¶17

for transferring the same to the Family Court at Chennai.

¶18

Section 19(iii-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, permits the

¶19

wife to initiate matrimonial proceedings before the Court in whose

¶20

jurisdiction she is residing at the time of institution of proceedings.

¶21

justifying the transfer. In fact, there is nothing on record suspecting the

¶22

bonafides in filing this transfer petition. Considering the physical

¶23

inconvenience caused to the petitioner, this Court is of the view that

¶24

http://www.judis.nic.in the transfer petition deserves to be allowed.

¶25

¶26

The proceedings in H.M.O.P.No.110 of 2017 is withdrawn

¶27

from the file of Principal Sub Court,Trichy and is transferred to the file

¶28

of Principal Family Court, Chennai, for disposal on merits.

¶29

The Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is disposed of.
No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
28.07.2017
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
bsm/tk
To
1) The Principal Sub-Court,
Trichy.
2) The Principal Family Court,
Chennai.

¶30

http://www.judis.nic.in

M.GOVINDARAJ, J.

bsm/tk

TR CMP NO.422 of 2017
AND CMP NO.8765 of 2017

¶35

28.07.2017

¶36

http://www.judis.nic.in

A.Alagammal v. S.Saravanan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

A.Alagammal v. S.Saravanan

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

H.a.Abdul Jabbar Vs the Registrar

M.Ramakrishnan Vs the Commissioner

S.K.Raman Vs D.John

Celine Preetha Vs Maria Dominic Raj

M.H.Abusama Bevi@Sabina Vs Mohamed Shaliq

Krishnasamy Ramesh Vs Smt.Subramanian Artheeswari