The court dismissed a transfer petition seeking to move a divorce suit from Chengalpattu to Ranipet. The court held that the delay of three years and the stage of trial justified dismissal to prevent further dilatory tactics, noting the respondent's health issues. Petition dismissed.
Transfer petition dismissed; connected C.M.P. closed. No costs awarded.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 20.11.2020
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAJA
TR.C.M.P.No.181 of 2020
&
C.M.P.No.5859 of 2020
A.V.Uma Maheswari ..Petitioner
Vs.
C.Venkatesan
..Respondent
Petition to withdraw and transfer the original petition in F.C.O.P. NO. 32 of 2017 from the file of the learned Family Court Judge at Chengalpattu, Kancheepuram District to the file of the learned Subordinate Judge at Ranipet, Vellore District to be tried along with H.M.O.P. NO. 168 of 2019.
For Petitioner :: Mr.J.T. Rajasuriya For Respondent :: Ms.A.S. Neela Narayani
ORDER
This petition has been filed by one A.V.Uma Maheswari, wife of the respondent herein, seeking transfer of F.C.O.P. NO. 32 of 2017 filed by the respondent/husband seeking a decree of divorce by dissolving the marriage of the petitioner with the respondent solemnised on 06.03.2016 on the ground of cruelty and ill treatment pending on the file of Family Court, Chengalpattu to the file of Sub Court, Ranipet, Vellore District where H.M.O.P. NO. 168 of 2019 filed by the petitioner for restitution of conjugal rights is pending.
petitioner was not co-operating for conjugal relationship. But, according to the learned counsel, the fact of the case is that the respondent/husband was demanding dowry and as sufficent dowry was not given, he was not showing love and affection from the first day. Further, he has filed the present F.C.O.P. 32 of 2017 with false allegations. On receipt of summons and notice, the petitioner has filed a detailed counter affidaivt on 12.09.2017 denying all the allegations. As the distance between the petitioner's place and the Family Court at Chengalpattu is about 140 Kms, it will be difficult for the petitioner to undertake a long journey. Therefore, the prayer for transfer may be allowed, it is pleaded.
dissolution of marriage on the ground of cruelty and illtreatment. The reason mentioned shows that even on the first night of the marriage, the petitioner/wife refused to co-operate for marital relationship. Secondly, when the petitioner has also filed her counter affidavit on 12.09.2017, after three years, it is not now open to her to approach this Court seeking transfer when the matter is going to be taken up for trial. Therefore, considering the fact that at this crucial stage, if the matter is transferred, it would brook further delay, the transfer C.M.P. stands dismissed. No costs. Connected C.M.P. is closed.
-Sd/Assistant Registrar (CS III) // True Copy // Sub Assistant Registrar nv To 1.The Sub Court, Ranipet, Vellore District. 2.The Family Court, Chengalpattu, kancheepuram district. 3.The Section Officer, VR Section, High Court, Madras. +1 C.C. to MR.DAMODHARAN AdvocateSR.NO.37705
Tr.C.M.P. No. 181 of 2020
MG (CO) UM (14.12.2020)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a transfer petition filed three years after filing of the divorce petition and after the matter became ripe for trial should be allowed when a party raises covid health concerns or distance di
Whether allowing transfer at a crucial stage of trial would cause delay and defeat justice.
A.V.Uma Maheswari
C.Venkatesan
T.Raja
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
