Allowed

Chandralekha v. M.Mithunshirpi

Madras HC4 Jan 2021TR CMP(MD)/231/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition filed by a wife to transfer divorce proceedings from Family Court, Dindigul to Family Court, Madurai. The court allowed the transfer to Principal Sub Court, Madurai, considering jurisdiction and convenience to reduce travel burden on both parties.

What did the court decide?

H.M.O.P.No.141 of 2019 withdrawn from Family Court, Dindigul and transferred to Principal Sub Court, Madurai.

Chandralekha Vs M.Mithunshirpi — Matrimonial and Divorce | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

Tr.C.M.P.(MD)No.231 of 2020

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 04.01.2021

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN

¶6

Tr.C.M.P.(MD)No.231 of 2020 and C.M.P.(MD)No.5215 of 2020

Chandralekha

... Petitioner

versus

M.Mithunshirpi ... Respondent

¶11

Transfer Petition filed under Section 24 of C.P.C. seeking to withdraw the case in H.M.O.P.No.141 of 2019 on the file of the Family Court, Dindigul and transfer to the Family Court, Madurai.

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr.C.Mayilvahana Rajendran

¶13

For Respondent : Mr.M.Veilkani Raju

¶14

ORDER

¶15

The petitioner/wife, who is facing the proceedings of divorce initiated by her husband in H.M.O.P.No.141 of 2019 on the file of the Family Court, Dindigul, seeks transfer of the same to the Family Court, Madurai.

¶16

According to the petitioner/wife, she is working at Madurai and it will be very difficult for her to travel to Dindigul for every hearing at Family Court, Dindigul.

¶17

Mr.M.Veilkani Raju, learned counsel appearing for the respondent would submit that the respondent/husband will be put to inconvenience, if he is forced to travel to Madurai for every hearing.

¶18

Considering the claims made at the bar, I am of the considered opinion that the Original Petition could be transferred to the Principal Sub Court, Madurai, which also has jurisdiction to hear the matrimonial matters, so that, inconvenience to both parties is reduced as the proceedings before the Sub Court do not require the presence of the parties for every hearing. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶19

1/4

¶20

Tr.C.M.P.(MD)No.231 of 2020

¶21

In view of the above, this Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is allowed and H.M.O.P.No.141 of 2019 pending on the file of the Family Court, Dindigul is withdrawn and transferred to the Principal Sub Court, Madurai. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶22

Sd/-

¶23

Assistant Registrar (AS)

¶24

// True Copy //

¶25

/ /2021 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶26

ogy

¶27

Note: In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy,shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.

¶28

¶29

1.The Judge,Family Court, Dindigul.

¶30

2.The Judge,Principal Sub Court, Madurai.

¶31

Tr.C.M.P.(MD)No.231 of 2020 and C.M.P.(MD)No.5215 of 2020 04.01.2021

¶32

(MK)CO AP(19/01/2021) 2P 3C

¶33

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

¶34

2/4

Chandralekha v. M.Mithunshirpi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chandralekha v. M.Mithunshirpi

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

Mr.a.Kirubakaran Vs K.M.F.Hospital

M.Vinayagam Vs M.Govindaraj

N.Maragatham Vs Mayvaram Financial Chit

K.Thangaraj (Died) Vs C.Palaniappan

Vasudevan Vs Alagarsamy

Venkateswari Vs Sril Akilan