Allowed

Mrs.Maragathamanimala v. Mr.B.Selvapandian

Madras HC3 Oct 2018TR CMP/617/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Madras allowed the transfer of divorce proceedings from the Family Court in Trichirappalli to the Principal Family Court in Coimbatore, citing the petitioner's residence, health constraints, and the respondent's attendance at Coimbatore for a pending maintenance claim.

What did the court decide?

HMOP No.36 of 2018 withdrawn from Family Court, Trichirappalli and transferred to Family Court, Coimbatore; connected CMP No.15044 closed.

Mrs.Maragathamanimala Vs Mr.B.Selvapandian — Service and Employment | 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.617 of 2018 and CMP.No.15044 of 2018

¶7

Maragathamanimala ... Petitioner

¶8

Vs.

¶9

B.Selvapandian ... Respondent

¶10

Prayer :- Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition has been filed under Section 24 of CPC to withdraw the proceedings in HMOP No.36 of 2018 pending before the Family Court, Thrichirapalli and transfer the same to the Principal Family Court, Coimbatore.

¶11

For Petitioner : Mrs.V.S.Usharani

¶12

For Respondent : No appearance Set exparte vide order dated 28.09.2018

¶13

ORDER

¶14

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

¶15

2.The respondent has laid divorce case against the petitioner in HMOP.No.36 of 2018 and the same is pending on the file of the Family Court, Trichirappalli.

¶16

3.Seeking the transfer of the above proceeding from the Family Court, Trichirappalli to the Family Court, Coimbatore, the petitioner has come forward with this transfer request stating that she is a resident of Coimbatore and dependent upon her parents for survival and unable to travel to Trichirapalli Court for defending the divorce proceeding laid against her by the respondent and furthermore, she has also stated that she has preferred maintenance claim against the respondent in M.C.No.101 of 2018 and the same is pending on the file of the Principal Family Court, Coimbatore and accordingly, her health also does not permit her to travel a long distance and hence, prayed for the transfer.

¶17

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.

¶18

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

¶19

Trichirappalli Court and the same is not challenged by the respondent. Furthermore, it is also seen that the respondent is working at Chennai and therefore, the conduct of the proceeding at Coimbatore would not in any manner seriously cause prejudice to the respondent as such. Accordingly, it is seen that he has not shown interest to contest the transfer request of the petitioner. That apart, it is also noted that the respondent would be required to attend the proceeding at Family Court, Coimbatore to defend the maintenance claim preferred against him by the petitioner. In such view of the matter, the transfer request of the petitioner is found to be just and acceptable.

¶20

For the reasons aforestated, HMOP No.36 of 2018 is withdrawn from the file of the Family Court, Trichirappallai and transferred to the file of the Family Court, Coimbatore for disposal as per law.

¶21

Accordingly, the Transfer Civil Miscellaneous petition is allowed. Consequently, connected CMP.No.15044 of 2018 is closed.

03.10.2018

Index : Yes / No

Internet : Yes / No

sms

1.The Family Court, Trichirappallai.

¶28

The Family Court, Coimbatore.

¶29

T.RAVINDRAN, J.

¶30

sms

¶31

Pre-delivery Order made in Transfer CMP.No.617 of 2018 and

¶32

CMP.No.15044 of 2018

¶33

03.10.2018

Mrs.Maragathamanimala v. Mr.B.Selvapandian

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mrs.Maragathamanimala v. Mr.B.Selvapandian

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

Manjula Vs Mahakrishnan

S.Rajeswari Vs R.Sriram