Partly allowed

R.Vaishnavi v. G.Shanmuganathan@Manoj

Madras HC19 Jan 2021TR CMP(MD)/246/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court transferred a husband's petition for restitution of conjugal rights from the Family Court, Madurai to the Subordinate Court, Kumbakonam to be tried with the wife's pending nullity suit. Being an ex-parte motion, the petition was allowed, disposed of, and consequential petitions closed without costs.

What did the court decide?

H.M.O.P.No.404 of 2020 withdrawn from Family Court Madurai and transferred to Subordinate Court Kumbakonam to be tried with H.M.O.P.No.69 of 2020. Petition disposed of. No costs. Connected petitions c

R.Vaishnavi Vs G.Shanmuganathan@Manoj — Matrimonial and Divorce | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

TR.C.M.P.(MD)No.246 of 2020

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 19.01.2021

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN

¶6

TR.C.M.P.(MD)No.246 of 2020

¶7

and C.M.P.(MD)Nos.5484 and 5485 of 2020

¶8

R.Vaishnavi : Petitioner/Respondent

¶9

Vs.

¶10

G.Shanmuganathan @ Manoj : Respondent/Petitioner

¶11

PRAYER:- The petition filed under Section 24 of the Civil Procedure Code, to withdraw H.M.O.P.No.404 of 2020 pending on the file of the Family Court, Madurai and transfer the same to Subordinate Court, Kumbakonam, to be tried along with the pending H.M.O.P.No.69 of 2020 pending on its file.

¶12

For Petitioner :Mr.V.Raghavachari For Respondent :No appearance ****

¶13

ORDER

¶14

Notice sent through Court has been returned with an endorsement “not known”. Private notice has been served on 11.11.2020. Despite said service, the respondent is not appeared either in person or through Counsel duly instructed.

¶15

2.The wife seeks transfer of H.M.O.P.No.404 of 2020 filed by the husband on the file of the Family Court, Madurai, seeking restitution of conjugal rights, to the Subordinate Court, Kumbakonam, to be tried along with H.M.O.P.No.69 of 2020 filed by her seeking a decree of nullity of marriage.

¶16

3.From the sequence of events, it is seen that H.M.O.P.No.404 of 2020 is only a counter-blast to H.M.O.P.No.69 of 2020 filed by the wife at Kumbakonam.

¶17

4.Considering the convenience of the parties, particularly, the convenience of the wife, H.M.O.P.No.404 of 2020 pending on the file of the Family Court, Madurai, is withdrawn and transferred to Subordinate Court, Kumbakonam to be heard and disposed along with https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶18

1/2

¶19

TR.C.M.P.(MD)No.246 of 2020

¶20

H.M.O.P.No.69 of 2020 pending before it. Accordingly, this petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶21

// True Copy //

¶22

Sd/Assistant Registrar (CS-II) / /2021 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶23

cmr To 1.The Judge, Family Court, Madurai. 2.The Subordinate Judge, Subordinate Court, Kumbakonam. +1 CC to M/s.V.RAGHAVACHARI, Advocate ( SR-1730[F] dated 21/01/2021 )

¶24

TR.C.M.P.(MD)No.246 of 2020 19.01.2021 ARK(CO) NR (01/02/2021) 2P : 4C

¶25

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

¶26

2/2

R.Vaishnavi v. G.Shanmuganathan@Manoj

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.Vaishnavi v. G.Shanmuganathan@Manoj

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

Tmt.Nirmala Pius Vs Tmt.Jeela

Ismail Vs M.Mohammed Ghouse(Died)

Shriram General Insurance Vs Muthulakshmi @ Geetha Rani

Chitra Vs Sakthikannan

S.Rajkumar, Vs Nirmala Durairaj

Thangavel, Vs State of Tamil Nadu