Allowed

Manjula v. Mahakrishnan

Madras HC3 Oct 2018TR CMP/606/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Madras allowed a transfer petition to move a husband's divorce case from Sub Court, Thuraiyur to Sub Court, Attur. This consolidation is with the wife's pending restitution marriage case in Attur to prevent conflicting decisions and ease the wife's hardship.

What did the court decide?

HMOP No.49 of 2017 withdrawn from Thuraiyur Court and transferred to Attur Court; CMP No.14639 of 2018 closed.

Manjula Vs Mahakrishnan — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

RESERVED ON : 28.09.2018

¶3

PRONOUNCED ON : 03.10.2018

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAVINDRAN

¶6

Transfer CMP.No.606 of 2018
and
CMP.No.14639 of 2018
Manjula ... Petitioner
Vs.
Mahakrishnan ... Respondent
Prayer :- Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition has been filed
under Section 24 of CPC to withdraw HMOP No.49 of 2017 on the
file of the Sub Court, Thuraiyur and transfer the same to the
file of the Sub-Court, Attur to be heard along with HMOP No.78
of 2016 pending on its file.

¶7

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Kaithamalai Kumaran For Respondent : No appearance Set exparte vide order dated 28.09.2018 ORDER The petitioner is the wife. The respondent is the husband. 2.All is not well qua the marital life of the petitioner and the respondent.

¶8

3.The petitioner has laid HMOP No.78 of 2016 against the respondent for restitution of conjugal rights and the same is pending on the file of the Sub-Court, Attur. According to the petitioner, thereafter, the respondent has laid divorce case against the petitioner in HMOP.No.49 of 2017 and the same is pending on the file of the Sub-Court, Thuraiyur.

¶9

4.Seeking the transfer of the abovesaid proceeding from Thuraiyur Court to Attur Court, the transfer petition has been laid by the petitioner on the footing that she is a resident of Gangavalli Taluk, Salem District and experiencing difficulty and hardship in attending the proceeding at Thuraiyur Court and stated that she is dependent upon her aged parents and they are unable to assist her to defend the proceeding at Thuraiyur Court and furthermore, also pleaded that inasmuch as the two proceedings are pending as regards the marital issues of the parties in two differet Courts, the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ consolidation of the two proceedings and the determination of

¶10

the same by one and the same Court would be beneficial to both the parties and also avoid conflict of decisions and accordingly, prayed for the transfer.

¶11

5.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.

¶12

6.The two proceedings are pending between the parties as regards their marital issues in two different forums. Accordingly, it is seen that as rightly put forth, the consolidation of the two proceedings together and the determination of the same by one and the same Court would be beneficial to both the parties and also avoid conflict of decisions. Furthermore, by way of the same, the parties would be required to adduce common evidence in both the proceedings. Thus, it is found that cause of justice would be advanced, if the two proceedings are jointly tried and determined by one and the same Court.

¶13

7.The petitioner has putforth certain inconvenience and hardship in attending the proceeding at Thuraiyur Court and the same has not been contested by the respondent. Furthermore, it is also stated that the respondent is employed in Thirupur and thereby, he would not be prejudiced in any manner if both the proceedings are conducted and tried at Attur Court. The abovesaid reasons projected by the petitioner for seeking the transfer are found to just and acceptable.

¶14

8.For the reasons aforestated, HMOP No.49 of 2017 is withdrawn from the file of the Sub Court, Thuraiyur and transferred to the file of the Sub-Court, Attur for disposal as per law.

¶15

Accordingly, the Transfer Civil Miscellaneous petition is allowed. Consequently, connected CMP.No.14639 of 2018 is closed.

¶16

//True Copy//

¶17

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶18

sms

¶19

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

¶20

¶21

1.The Sub Court, Thuraiyur.

¶22

2.The Sub-Court, Attur.

¶23

+1cc to Mr.S.Kaithamalai Kumaran, Advocate SR.NO.67991

¶24

sm:31.10.2018

¶25

Transfer CMP.No.606 of 2018 and CMP.No.14639 of 2018

¶26

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

Manjula v. Mahakrishnan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manjula v. Mahakrishnan

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

S.Rajeswari Vs R.Sriram