Allowed

M.Esakkiammal v. S.Arumugam

Madras HC8 Nov 2019TR CMP(MD)/343/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought transfer of husband's divorce petition from Chennai Family Court to Dindigul Sub Court under Section 24 CPC due to residence and financial hardship. Court allowed transfer to Dindigul where petitioner resides.

What did the court decide?

Petition for transfer allowed; divorce petition transferred from Family Court, Chennai to Subordinate Court at Dindigul with direction to transmit records.

M.Esakkiammal Vs S.Arumugam — Matrimonial and Divorce | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

Tr.C.M.P.(MD) No.343 of 2019

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 08.11.2019

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE P.T.ASHA

¶6

TR.C.M.P.(MD) No.343 of 2019 and C.M.P.(MD) No.7948 of 2019

¶7

M.Esakkiammal ... Petitioner

¶8

vs.

¶9

S.Arumugam ... Respondent

¶10

Prayer:- This Petition is filed under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, to withdraw the proceedings in HMOP.No.2671 of 2019 on the file of the Family Court, Chennai and transfer the same to the file of Sub Court, Dindigul.

¶11

For Petitioner : Mr.C.Prithiviraj For Respondent : Mr.Prabu

¶12

ORDER

¶13

The above Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed by the petitioner/wife seeking to transfer the petition in HMOP.No.2671 of 2019 filed by the respondent/husband for divorce on the file of the Family Court, Chennai and transfer the same to the file of Sub Court, Dindigul.

¶14

2.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/wife would submit that the respondent/husband had left the petitioner in a lurch and she is unable to defend the case at Chennai as it is very difficult to travel from Dindigul to Chennai by herself and further, she requires the assistance of another person, both for travel and stay at Chennai and now, since the husband has not been giving her any maintenance money, she is totally depending on her parents for her day to day expenses.

¶15

3.Considering the fact that the residence of the petitioner/wife is also conferred with the jurisdiction to try the petition for divorce and taking into account the hardship that is likely to be caused to the petitioner/wife, this Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is allowed and the petition in H.M.O.P.No.2671 of 2019 pending on the file of the Family Court, Chennai, is ordered to be withdrawn and transferred to the file of https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶16

1/2

¶17

Tr.C.M.P.(MD) No.343 of 2019

¶18

Subordinate Court at Dindigul. The learned Judge, Family Court, Chennai, is directed to transmit the entire records of H.M.O.P.No.2671 of 2019 to the Subordinate Court at Dindigul as expeditiously as possible. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is also closed.

¶19

Sd/Assistant Registrar (writs) // True Copy //

¶20

Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶21

mm To 1.The Judge, Family Court, Chennai. 2.The Subordinate Judge, Dindigul. +1 CC to Mr.M.PRABU, Advocate ( SR-97093[F] dated 08/11/2019 ) +1 CC to Mr.C.PRITHIVIRAJ, Advocate ( SR-97355[F] dated 11/11/2019 ) TR.C.M.P.(MD) No.343 of 2019 08.11.2019 VB(04.12.2019) 2P 5C

¶22

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

¶23

2/2

M.Esakkiammal v. S.Arumugam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.Esakkiammal v. S.Arumugam

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

Gnanaguru Vs Murugesan

A.Revathi Narmatha Vs M.S.Sivathanu

J.Arunarani, D/o.B.Jayapal Singh, Vs a.Jayaraman

R.Ulagammal @ Usha Nandhini, Vs G.Pon Muthu

S.Anandhalakshmi Vs T.Senthilkumar

A.Ganesan Vs P.Kaliyammal