Allowed

Maheswari v. B.Karthick

Madras HC17 Jun 2021TR CMP(MD)/141/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner, Maheswari, filed a transfer petition under Section 24 CPC to move a pending maintenance case from Family Court, Madurai to Tiruchirappalli due to distance and lack of income. The court found her reasons valid and granted the transfer.

What did the court decide?

H.M.O.P.No.772 of 2020 withdrawn from Family Court, Madurai and transferred to Family Court, Tiruchirappalli; judge of Madurai directed to transmit papers.

Maheswari Vs B.Karthick — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

Tr CMP (MD) No. 141 of 2021

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 17.06.2021 CORAM:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.A.NAKKIRAN Tr.C.M.P.(MD) No.141 of 2021 and C.M.P.(MD)No.2661 of 2021 Maheswari ... Petitioner/Respondent -vsB.Karthick ... Respondent/Petitioner

¶4

PRAYER: Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, to withdraw the H.M.O.P.No.772 of 2020 pending on the file of the Family Court, Madurai and transfer the same to the file of the Family Court or any other competent court, Tiruchirapalli.

¶5

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Alagumani For Respondent : No appearance

¶6

O R D E R

¶7

The present Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed to withdraw H.M.O.P.No.772 of 2020 pending on the file of the Family Court, Madurai and transfer the same to the file of the Family Court or any other competent court, Tiruchirapalli.

¶8

2.The respondent/ husband has filed H.M.O.P.No.772 of 2020 before the Family Court, Madurai, for divorce.

¶9

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is having two child and she is depending on her aged parents and she has no source of income. Apart from this, the distance between Trichy and Madurai is 150 kms. In such circumstances, the petitioner could not able to travel from Trichy to Madurai for attending every hearing in H.M.O.P.No.772 of 2020 on the file of the Family Court, Madurai.

¶10

4.Though the name of the respondent is printed in the cause list, the respondent has not chosen to appear either in person or through counsel duly instructed.

¶11

This Court considered the arguments made by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶12

This Court is satisfied with the reasons stated in the affidavit filed in support of this petition.

¶13

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶14

5/5

¶15

Tr CMP (MD) No. 141 of 2021

¶16

petitioner, H.M.O.P.No.772 of 2020 is withdrawn from the file of the Family Court, Madurai and transferred to the file of the Family Court, Tiruchirappalli for disposal as per law. The Judge, Family Court, Madurai, is directed to transmit the papers to the Family Court, Tiruchirappalli forthwith. The Judge, Family Court, Tiruchirappalli is directed to dispose H.M.O.P.No.772 of 2020 on merits and in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible.

¶17

In fine, this Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶18

// True Copy //

¶19

/ /2021 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶20

To:

¶21

The Judge

¶22

Family Court, Madurai .

¶23

The Judge, Family Court Tiruchirappalli.

¶24

+1 CC to M/s.R.ALAGUMANI, Advocate ( SR-2180[I] dated 17/03/2021 )

¶25

KB(25.06.2021) 2P 4C

¶26

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

¶27

5/5

Maheswari v. B.Karthick

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Maheswari v. B.Karthick

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.Madhivadhani, Vs B.Prabhu

M.Dharani Alias Dhivya Vs C.Ramprasath

Meenal Vs P.L.Sambantham

Vijayalakshmi Vs Sudalaimuthu

P.Saranya, Vs R.Rameshkumar

Muthuselvi Vs P.Pattarajan