Allowed

Gnana Sundari Alias Sindhu, v. Vigneshwaran

Madras HC7 Jul 2021TR CMP(MD)/253/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court allowed a transfer petition under Section 24 CPC. It transferred H.M.O.P.No.102 of 2020 from the Family Court, Mannarkudi, to the Family Court, Dindigul, considering the petitioner's safety and distance issues, dispensing with personal appearances except on specific dates.

What did the court decide?

H.M.O.P.No.102 of 2020 transferred from Family Court, Mannarkudi, to Family Court, Dindigul. Personal appearance dispensed except on dates set by the Judge, Dindigul.

Gnana Sundari Alias Sindhu, Vs Vigneshwaran — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

Tr.C.M.P.(MD) No.253 of 2021

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED :07.07.2021 CORAM:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.A.NAKKIRAN Tr.C.M.P.(MD) No.253 of 2021 and CMP(MD).No.4989 of 2021

¶4

Gnana Sundari @ Sindhu ... Petitioner/Respondent

¶5

-vs-

¶6

Vigneshwaran

¶7

.... Respondent/Petitioner

¶8

PRAYER: Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, to withdraw HMOP.No.102 of 2020 from the file of Family Court, Mannarkudi and to transfer the same to Family Court, Dindigul.

¶9

For Petitioner : Mr.D.Senthil For Respondent : No appearance

¶10

O R D E R

¶11

The present Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed to withdraw HMOP.No.102 of 2020 from the file of Family Court, Mannarkudi and to transfer the same to Family Court, Dindigul.

¶12

2.The first respondent/husband has filed H.M.O.P.No.102 of 2020 before the Family Court, Mannarkudi, for divorce.

¶13

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner/wife submitted that the petitioner is having 3 years old child and she is living with her age old parents home. The distance between Dindigul and Mannarkudi is about 200 kms. Since the respondent and his in-laws are very influential persons, there is life threat at the hands of the respondent. In such circumstances, it is very difficult for the petitioner to travel from Dindigul to Mannarkudi for attending every hearing in H.M.O.P.No.102 of 2020. Therefore, he seeks to transfer the case to Dindigul.

¶14

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.

¶15

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

¶16

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and considering the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, H.M.O.P.No.102 of 2020 is withdrawn from the Family Court, Mannarkudi and transferred to the file of the Family Court, Dindigul, for disposal as per law. The Judge, Family Court, https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶17

1/2

¶18

Tr.C.M.P.(MD) No.253 of 2021

¶19

Mannarkudi, is directed to transmit the papers to the file of the learned Judge, Family Court, Dindigul, forthwith. The Judge, Family Court, Dindigul, is directed to dispose of the case in H.M.O.P.No.102 of 2020 on merits and in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible.

¶20

7.The personal appearance of both parties before the Family Court, Dindigul, is dispensed with, except the dates of hearing, on which, the learned Judge insisted upon the parties to appear before the Court. On other hearing dates, the counsel on behalf of the parties may appear before the court.

¶21

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

¶22

Assistant Registrar (CS-II)

¶23

// True Copy //

¶24

/ /2021 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶25

msa

¶26

To:

¶27

The Judge, Family Court, Mannarkudi

¶28

The Judge, Family Court, Dindigul.

¶29

Tr.C.M.P.(MD) No.253 of 2021 and CMP(MD).No.4989 of 2021 07.07.2021

¶30

PM(CO) LR (14.07.2021) 2P 3C

¶31

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

¶32

2/2

Gnana Sundari Alias Sindhu, v. Vigneshwaran

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gnana Sundari Alias Sindhu, v. Vigneshwaran

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

Ruby Vs Yosappu

Arivumathi Vs a. Kesavan

Shanmuga Priya, Vs Pradeep Kumar

The Branch Manger Vs S.Revathi

Yougansan Vs The Inspector of Police

C.T.Annathana Charity Trust, Vs the State of Tamil Nadu, by