Allowed

Teekkamani v. Senthilkumar

Madras HC3 Oct 2018TR CMP/497/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Madras considered a transfer petition filed by a wife seeking to move a restitution of conjugal rights proceeding from Ranipet to Arni. The court noted the petitioner's hardship and the respondent's residence in the Arni taluk, finding sound cause for transfer.

What did the court decide?

HMOP No.61 of 2017 withdrawn from Sub-Court, Ranipet and transferred to Sub-Court, Arni.

Teekkamani Vs Senthilkumar — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS RESERVED ON : 28.09.2018 PRONOUNCED ON : 03.10.2018

¶2

CORAM

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAVINDRAN

¶4

Transfer CMP.No.497 of 2018 and CMP.No.12243 of 2018 Teekkamani ... Petitioner

¶5

Vs.

¶6

Senthilkumar ... Respondent

¶7

Prayer :- Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition has been filed under Section 24 of CPC to withdraw HMOP No.61 of 2017 on the file of the Sub-Court, Ranipet and Transfer the same to the Sub-Court, Arni.

¶8

For Petitioner : Mr.P.Satheeshkumar

¶9

For Respondent : No appearance Set exparte vide order dated 28.09.2018

¶10

ORDER

¶11

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

¶12

2.The respondent has levied HMOP No.61 of 2017 against the petitioner for restitution of conjugal rights and the same is pending on the file of the Sub-Court, Ranipet.

¶13

3.Seeking the transfer of the abovesaid proceeding to Sub-Court, Arni, the transfer petition has been laid by the petitioner on the footing that she being a lady and dependent upon her aged parents and also due to physical ailments and vision problems, unable to duly defend the proceeding at Ranipet Court and also putforth that she is looking after her young son and therefore, prayed for the transfer of the proceeding from Ranipet Court to Arni Court. Further, it is also stated that the respondent is a resident of Thimiri, Arcot Taluk and hence, the conduct of the proceeding at Arni Court would not cause serious prejudice to the respondent.

¶14

4.In this matter, though the respondent had been served, he has not evinced interest to challenge the transfer request of the petitioner and accordingly, on being called and remaining absent and he has been set exparte.

¶15

5.The petitioner has putforth certain inconvenience and hardship in attending the proceeding at

¶16

Ranipet Court and the same has not been controverted by the respondent in any manner. Accordingly, it is seen that as the cause projected by the petitioner for seeking the transfer are genuine and just, the respondent also has not shown any inclination to challenge the same. The respondent being the resident of Thimiri, Arcot Taluk, as rightly putforth, he would also not be prejudiced in the conduct of the proceeding at Arni Court as prayed for by the petitioner. In all, it is seen that the petitioner has made out a sound cause for accepting the transfer request putforth by her.

¶17

6.For the reasons aforestated, HMOP No.61 of 2017 is withdrawn from the file of the Sub Court, Ranipet and transferred to the file of the Sub-Court, Arni for disposal as per law.

¶18

Accordingly, the Transfer Civil Miscellaneous petition is allowed. Consequently, connected CMP.No.12243 of 2018 is closed.

¶19

03.10.2018

¶20

Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No sms To 1.The Sub Court, Ranipet. 2.The Sub-Court, Arni.

¶21

T.RAVINDRAN, J.

¶22

sms

¶23

Pre-delivery Order made in Transfer CMP.No.497 of 2018

¶24

and CMP.No.12243 of 2018

¶25

03.10.2018

Teekkamani v. Senthilkumar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Teekkamani v. Senthilkumar

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

S.M. Gnanapriya Vs Sivabalan

Lavanya Vs Prabhu

Mrs.K.Jeseena Begam Vs Mr.M.Kalilrahman

His Holiness Head of Sri Kasi Vs B.Ramamurthy

Mrs.Maragathamanimala Vs Mr.B.Selvapandian

Manjula Vs Mahakrishnan