Allowed

Mrs. S. Pavithra v. a. Prabhuram No 13A

Madras HC23 Oct 2018TR CMP/320/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court transferred a pending divorce case from Sub-Court Kancheepuram to Sub-Court Tambaram. The transfer was based on the petitioner's residence near Tambaram, her need to assist her parents, and the respondent's employment in Bangalore, ensuring no prejudice to either party.

What did the court decide?

Transfer of HMOP No.249 of 2016 from Sub-Court, Kancheepuram to Sub-Court, Tambaram; Transfer CMP.Patient No. Closed.

Mrs. S. Pavithra Vs a. Prabhuram No 13A — Matrimonial and Divorce | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

RESERVED ON : 12.10.2018

¶3

PRONOUNCED ON : 23.10.2018

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAVINDRAN

¶6

Transfer CMP.No.320 of 2017 and CMP.No.5993 of 2017 S.Pavithra ... Petitioner

¶7

Vs.

¶8

A.Prabhuram ... Respondent

¶9

Prayer :- Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition has been filed under Section 24 of CPC to withdraw the HMOP No.249 of 2016 on the file of the Sub-Ordinate Court, Kancheepuram and transfer the same to the file of the Sub-ordinate Court, Tambaram.

¶10

For Petitioner : Mr.V.Chandrakanthan

¶11

Respondent : No appearance set exparte vide order dated 12.10.2018

¶12

ORDER

¶13

The petitioner is the wife. The respondent is the husband.

¶14

2.The respondent has levied HMOP No.249 of 2016 against the petitioner for divorce and the same is pending on the file of the Sub-Court, Kancheepuram.

¶15

3.Seeking transfer of the abovesaid proceeding to the Sub-Court, Tambaram, the transfer petition has been laid by the petitioner on the footing that the petitioner is residing at Chitlappakkam, Chennai and unable to attend the proceeding at Kancheepuram Court and also depending upon her aged parents and there is no one to assist her in defending the proceeding at Kancheepuram and also apprehends danger to her life and body at the hands of the respondent at Kancheepuram and considering the fact that the respondent is working at Bangalore, as no prejudice would be caused to the respondent in the event of the abovesaid OP transferred to Tambaram Court as prayed for and accordingly, requested for effecting the transfer.

¶16

4.In so far as this matter is concerned, though the respondent had been served, he has not chosen to contest the transfer request of the petitioner and accordingly, he having been called and remaining absent, been set exparte.

¶17

5.The petitioner has put forth certain inconvenience and hardship in attending the proceeding at Kancheepuram Court and the same has not been controverted by the respondent by challenging the same.

¶18

6.Furthermore, as put forth by the petitioner and also admitted by the respondent himself in the divorce case preferred by him, he is working at Bangalore and in such view of the matter, by way of the transfer of the proceeding to Tambaram Court, the respondent would not be seriously prejudiced and therefore, it is seen that the petitioner has made out a just cause for accepting the transfer request.

¶19

7.Furthermore, it is also seen that the petitioner has levied Domestic Violence Complaint against the respondent and the same is pending on the file of the Judicial Magistrate Court, Tambaram and it is seen that the respondent has also challenged the abovesaid proceeding by way of filing the criminal OP in the High Court to quash the same. Be that as it may, the respondent also would be required to defend the abovesaid proceeding at Tambaram Court.

¶20

8.In the light of the abovesaid reasons, HMOP No.249 of 2016 is withdrawn from the file of the SubCourt, Kancheepuram and transferred to the file of the Sub-Court, Tambaram for disposal as per law.

¶21

Accordingly, the Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is allowed. Consequently, connected CMP No.5993 of 2017 is closed.

23.10.2018

Index : Yes / No

Internet : Yes / No

sms

1.The Sub-Court, Kancheepuram. 2.The Sub-Court, Tambaram.

¶28

T.RAVINDRAN, J.

¶29

sms

¶30

Pre-delivery Order made in Transfer CMP.No.320 of 2017

¶31

and

¶32

CMP.No.5993 of 2017

¶33

23.10.2018

Mrs. S. Pavithra v. a. Prabhuram No 13A

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mrs. S. Pavithra v. a. Prabhuram No 13A

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

Alamelu Vs G.Kumar

Jothinathan Vs Angammal

Pichaimuthu Vs Rasu

Pichamuthu Padayachi Vs Panneerselvam

M. Rajendran Vs M. Ruthramoorthy

Godrej & bOYCE Manufacturin Vs the Tamilnadu Small Industries