Allowed

Vidya @ Irene v. Santhanasamy

Madras HC16 Feb 2021TR CMP/3/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner sought transfer of the matrimonial opposite party pending before the Family Court, Puducherry, to the Family Court, Thanjavur. The petition was filed under Section 24 of the CPC, citing convenience and separation issues for the petitioner and her minor children.

What did the court decide?

Transfer of M.O.P.No.82 of 2020 from Family Court, Puducherry to Family Court, Thanjavur allowed. No order as to costs.

Vidya @ Irene Vs Santhanasamy — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 16.02.2021 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM Tr.C.M.P.No.3 of 2021 and C.M.P.No.207 of 2021

Vidya @ Irene

.. Petitioner

vs.

Mr.Santhanasamy .. Respondent

¶6

PRAYER : Transfer CMP is filed under Section 24 of the Civil Procedure Code to withdraw the M.O.P.No.82 of 2020 from the learned Family Court at Puducherry, filed by the respondent and transfer the same to the learned Family Court, Thanjavur.

¶7

For Petitioner : Mr.P.Vijendran For Respondent : No appearance

¶8

O R D E R

¶9

The petition for transfer is filed to transfer M.O.P.No.82 of 2020 from Family Court, Puducherry to the Family Court, Thanjavur.

¶10

The marriage between the petitioner and the respondent was solemnized on 28.05.2009 at Holy Spirit Church, Tagore Nagar, Puducherry. The petitioner and the respondent started their Matrimonial life happily and two female child born from and out of the wedlock. The First child was born on 14.03.2010 and the second child was born on 28.04.2017. On account of the difference of opinion, the petitioner states that she was forced to leave the Matrimonial home and now living separately. The petitioner states that now along with the girl child, she is residing at Keelavasal, Thanjavur and therefore, it would be very difficult for her to travel all along from Thanjavur to Puducherry to defend the Divorce Petition filed by the husband in M.O.P.No.82 of 2020.

¶11

The fact remains that the complaint was also registered in All Women's Police Station on 06.01.2020, in order to secure the First daughter from the respondent. The learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner has to take care of the female child, aged about 3 years and therefore, she is not in a position to travel all along from Thanjavur to Puducherry.

¶12

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

¶13

The place of wife is preferable for the purpose of conducting the case in view of the facts and circumstances in the present case.

¶14

In view of the facts and circumstances, the M.O.P.No.82/2020 pending on the file of the Family Court, Puducherry stands transferred to the Family Court, Thanjavur.

¶15

Accordingly, this Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition No.3 of 2021 stands allowed and M.O.P.No.82 of 2020 pending on the file of the Family Court, Puducherry, is directed to be transferred to the Family Court, Thanjavur. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶16

-s/d-

¶17

Assistant Registrar

¶18

True Copy Sub-Assistant Registrar

¶19

Kak

¶20

¶21

1.The Judge, Family Court, Puducherry.

¶22

2.The Judge, Family Court, Thanjavur.

¶23

Tr.CMP No.3 of 2021

¶24

ssl(co) aa12/03/2021

¶25

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

Vidya @ Irene v. Santhanasamy

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vidya @ Irene v. Santhanasamy

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

M. Lajaru Vs Union of India

R.Mageswari Vs the Union of India Owning

S.Priyanka Vs the Union of India Owning

M/S.Sare Shelters Project Pvt. Ltd. Vs Sare Squires

Pakkiri Ammal Vs S. Ponnammal

M/S.Sri Bhavani Textiles Processors P Ltd. Vs Employees State Insurance Corporation