Allowed

K.Kaleeswari v. a.Amarnath

Madras HC28 Jul 2017TR CMP/443/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed a transfer petition under Section 24 CPC to move a matrimonial suit from Tirupur to Dharapuram. The transfer was permitted due to the petitioner's residence in Dharapuram with a one-year-old child and the pendency of another related suit in Dharapuram.

What did the court decide?

Transfer of proceedings H.M.O.P No.155 of 2017 from Principal Sub Court, Tirupur to Sub Court, Dharapuram; renumbering of Original Petition directed.

K.Kaleeswari Vs a.Amarnath — Service and Employment | 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.443 of 2017
AND CMP NO.9078 of 2017
K.Kaleeswari ... Petitioner
versus
A.Amarnath ... Respondent

¶7

PRAYER : Petition filed under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure to withdraw and transfer the H.M.O.P No.155 of 2017 pending before the Principal Sub-Court, Tirupur to Sub-Court, Dharapuram.

¶8

For Petitioner : Mr.A.S.Baalaji For Respondent : No appearance

¶9

O R D E R

¶10

The petitioner has filed this transfer petition with a prayer

¶11

to withdraw the proceedings in H.M.O.P No.155 of 2017 from the file of Principal Sub Court, Tirupur and transfer the same to the file of Sub http://www.judis.nic.in Court, Dharapuram.

¶12

¶13

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. There is no

¶14

appearance for the respondent.

¶15

The petitioner is a resident of Dharapuram, Tirupur

¶16

District. The respondent instituted a proceedings before the Subordinate Judge, Tirupur. According to the petitioner, she is having

¶17

one year old child and it is very difficult for her to travel to Tirupur along with her child. She has also filed a petition in H.M.O.P No. 87 of 2017 for restitution of conjugal rights, which is pending on the file of

¶18

Subordinate Court, Dharapuram.

¶19

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

¶20

bonafides in filing this transfer petition. Considering the physical

¶21

inconvenience caused to the petitioner, this Court is of the view that the transfer petition deserves to be allowed.

¶22

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

¶23

permits the wife to initiate matrimonial proceedings before the Court in

¶24

http://www.judis.nic.in whose jurisdiction she is residing at the time of institution of

¶25

¶26

proceedings.

¶27

The proceedings in H.M.O.P.No.155 of 2017 is withdrawn

¶28

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

¶29

Court, Dharapuram, to be tried along with H.M.O.P No. 87 of 2017. The

¶30

Sub Court, Dharapuram, is directed to renumber the Original Petition

¶31

and proceed in accordance with law.

¶32

The Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is disposed of
accordingly. 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,
Tirupur.

¶33

1. The Sub Court, Dharapuram.

¶34

http://www.judis.nic.in

M.GOVINDARAJ, J.

bsm/tk

TR CMP NO.443 of 2017
AND CMP NO.9078 of 2017

¶39

28.07.2017

¶40

http://www.judis.nic.in

K.Kaleeswari v. a.Amarnath

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Kaleeswari v. a.Amarnath

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