Dismissed

S. Subbiah v. S. Gomathi

Madras HC1 Jun 2017TR CMP(MD)/194/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of Madras High Court dismissed a petition filed by a petitioner husband seeking transfer of divorce proceedings from Sub Court, Devakottai to Family Court, Madurai. The court rejected the grounds of potential respondent hardship and reputation damage as legally unsound, holding the original court had jurisdiction. The connected petition was also closed.

What did the court decide?

Petition for transfer dismissed; connected M.P. closed; no costs.

S. Subbiah Vs S. Gomathi — Matrimonial and Divorce | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 01.06.2017

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.V.KARTHIKEYAN

¶6

TR.CMP(MD) No.194 of 2017 and CMP(MD) No.4309 of 2017

S.Subbiah

... Petitioner

Vs.

S.Gomathi ... Respondent

¶11

PRAYER: This petition is filed under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, to withdraw the H.M.O.P.No.173 of 2016 on the file of the Sub Court, Devakottai and also to transfer the same to the Family Court, Madurai.

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr.RaguvaranGopalan

¶13

O R D E R

¶14

The petitioner is the husband and the respondent is the wife. They had been married on 01.07.1993. In the affidavit of the petitioner, it is seen that the age of the petitioner is 55 years. The respondent had initiated the proceedings in HMOP.No.173 of 2016 before the Sub Court, Devakottai, seeking to dissolve the marriage solemnized between the petitioner and the respondent.

¶15

2.The learned counsel stated that the petitioner is working as the Vice Chancellor of Alagappa University, Karaikudi in Sivagangai District. However, in the affidavit it is stated that the petitioner is working at Vice Chancellor Office, Alagappa University, Karaikudi, Sivagangai District. It is also stated that there is an elder son, who is unfortunately mentally challenged and now, he is in the custody of the respondent. The respondent is working as a Professor at Madurai. She deem it fit to file HMOP.No.173 of 2016 before the Sub Court, Devakottai. Among the reasons for seeking transfer, the petitioner claims that it would actually benefit the respondent and also claims that his reputation would be lowered if he appears before the Sub Court, Devakottai. So far as the first reason is concerned, the respondent should have considered her relative hardships before https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ initiating the proceedings on the file of the Sub Court, Devakottai. The said Court is actually the Court which has

¶16

¶17

jurisdiction. It is not for the petitioner to express concern on behalf of the respondent and express her supposed difficulties if any. The said reason is rejected. With regard to the second reason I am not able to affected, if the very same divorce proceedings are continued in any Court. The fact is that divorce petition is pending and that should be the cause for concern and reputation is not dependent on the situs of the litigation or where it has been instituted.

¶18

3.I find no reasons to entertain the Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition. The reasons does not stand legal scrutiny. Hence, this petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected M.P is also closed.

¶19

Sd/-

¶20

Assistant Registrar(CS-III)

¶21

/True Copy/

¶22

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶23

¶24

1. The Subordinate Judge, Devakottai.

¶25

2.The Judge, Family Court, Madurai.

¶26

+1cc to Mr.K.Prabhakar, Advocate in SR.No.58471

¶27

Ls/Ns

¶28

AE/MR/SAR3/23.06.2017/2P/4C

¶29

TR.CMP(MD) No.194 of 2017 and CMP(MD) No.4309 of 2017 01.06.2017

¶30

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

S. Subbiah v. S. Gomathi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S. Subbiah v. S. Gomathi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

A.Athinamilagi Vs the Inspector of Police

Manikandan, Vs the Inspector of Police

Rajagopal, Vs the Inspector of Police

The Deputy Chief Engineer, Vs Kandasamy

The Deputy Chief Engineer, Vs E.K.Subramanian

The Deputy Chief Engineer, Vs Subrayan