Allowed

P.Ivanjelin Jeni, v. G.Dhomas Albert

Madras HC3 Oct 2019TR CMP(MD)/153/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench allowed a transfer petition seeking to move divorce proceedings from the Principal District Judge, Tuticorin, to Thirunelveli. The petitioner, seeking to minimize travel strain due to financial dependence and childcare responsibilities, successfully convinced the court to direct the record transmission.

What did the court decide?

Directed Principal District Judge, Tuticorin, to transmit records to Principal District Court, Tirunelveli, within two weeks for expeditious disposal.

P.Ivanjelin Jeni, Vs G.Dhomas Albert — Matrimonial and Divorce | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

Tr.C.M.P(MD)No.153 of 2018

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 03.10.2019

¶4

CORAM :

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE P.T.ASHA

¶6

Tr.C.M.P(MD)No.153 of 2018

¶7

and C.M.P.(MD) No.3427 of 2018

¶8

P.Ivanjelin Jeni ... Petitioner

¶9

Vs.

¶10

G.Dhomas Albert ... Respondent

¶11

PRAYER: Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed under Section 24 of Civil Procedure Code to withdraw D.O.P.No.178 of 2017 on the file of the Principal District Judge, Tuticorin and the same may be transferred to Principal District Judge, Thirunelveli.

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr.M.P.Amalan For Respondent : No appearance

¶13

J U D G M E N T

¶14

This petition is filed by the wife seeking to transfer D.O.P.No.178 of 2017 filed by the respondent/husband for divorce from the file of the Principal District Judge, Tuticorin, to the file of the Principal District Judge, Tirunelveli.

¶15

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and there is no appearance on behalf of the respondent.

¶16

From a reading of the affidavit filed in support of this Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition, it is seen that the respondent and the petitioner married as per the Christian rites and customs on 30.12.2015. The petitioner contends that the parents of the petitioner gave considerable jewels, cash and household articles. But from the day of marriage, the respondent and his parents had been demanding dowry and had been torturing her in this regard. The petitioner has been blessed with a girl child on 22.05.2017. In fact, when the petitioner had conceived, the respondent and his parents wanted her to abort the child for which the petitioner had not acceded to. The respondent/husband is neither maintaining her nor the child and he is also not taking steps to reunite despite several steps taken by the petitioner in this regard. 4. The petitioner was shocked to receive the summons in https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶17

1/2

¶18

Tr.C.M.P(MD)No.153 of 2018

¶19

D.O.P.No.178 of 2017 from the Principal District Judge, Tuticorin, from which she came to know that the respondent has taken steps to dissolve the marriage between her and the respondent. On receiving the summons, the petitioner has subsequently come forward with this application since she is totally depending on her parents for day to day expenses and every travel to Tuticorin would be a strain on her physically and financially. She has also the child to take care of. The child also suffers from certain problems for which the child is undergoing treatment.

¶20

In these circumstances, she has sought to have the petition transferred to Tirunelveli.

¶21

Considering the valid, justifiable reasons that has been put forward by the petitioner seeking to transfer, this Court is inclined to issue the following direction:

¶22

i) The learned Principal District Judge, Tuticorin, is directed to transmit the entire records in I.D.O.P.No.178 of 2017 to the file of the Principal District Court, Tirunelveli, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

¶23

ii) the learned Principal District Judge, Titurnelveli, after obtaining the records on transfer, is directed to dispose of D.O.P.No.178 of 2017 as expeditiously as possible in accordance with law.

¶24

In the result, this transfer civil miscellaneous petition is allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶25

Assistant Registrar (CS II)

¶26

// True Copy //

¶27

Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶28

¶29

¶30

1.The Principal District Judge, Tuticorin.

¶31

2.The Principal District Judge, Trichirappalli.

¶32

+1 CC to M/s.M.S.JEYAKARTHIK, Advocate ( SR-91235[F] dated 04/10/2019 )

¶33

Tr.C.M.P(MD)No.153 of 2018

¶34

and C.M.P.(MD) No.3427 of 2018 03.10.2019

¶35

KK/SAR/23.10.2019/2P-4C/ https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶36

2/2

P.Ivanjelin Jeni, v. G.Dhomas Albert

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.Ivanjelin Jeni, v. G.Dhomas Albert

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

Aravind Subramanian Vs Siva Subramanian @

Govindan Vs Nagendran

Alagulakshmi Vs Duraipandian

Amarkantak Farms Private Ltd. Vs Mr.G.Anilkumar

G.Jayaprakash Vs the Assistant Executive

P.K.Ananthan Vs M.Meenakshi