Allowed

Vivegaa Arumugam v. L.Subramania Prakash

Madras HC1 Mar 2022TR CMP/15/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner, respondent in a divorce suit, applied for transfer of proceedings from Coimbatore to Salem citing hostility, lack of maintenance, and residence. The court considered the reasons justified and granted the transfer. The connected petition was closed.

What did the court decide?

Transfer of divorce proceedings from Principal Family Court, Coimbatore to District Family Court, Salem allowed. Connected Civil Miscellaneous Petition closed.

Vivegaa Arumugam Vs L.Subramania Prakash — Property and Title | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 01.03.2022

¶3

C O R A M

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE P.T.ASHA

¶5

TR.C.M.P. NO.15 OF 2022 AND C.M.P.NO.467 OF 2022

¶6

Vivegaa Arumugam ...Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

L.Subramania Prakash ...Respondent

¶9

Prayer : Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition filed under Section 24 of the Civil Procedure Code to withdraw the H.M.O.P.No.535 of 2020 pending on the file of the learned Principal Family Judge, Coimbatore and transfer the same to the learned District Family Court at Salem.

¶10

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Chandrasekaran

¶11

For Respondent : Served. No appearance

¶12

O R D E R

¶13

The respondent wife in a petition for divorce before the Principal Family Court, Coimbatore, is the petitioner before this Court seeking transfer of the said proceedings to the file of the District Family Court, Salem.

¶14

The reasons for seeking the transfer are as follows:-

¶15

(a) She is living with her baby son in her parental home on their mercy;

¶16

(b) She faces an hostile atmosphere when she visits Coimbatore, thereby instilling fear in her;

¶17

(c ) Every time she has to attend hearing, since the matter is before the Principal Family Court, Coimbatore, she has to travel with her baby as well, which causes inconvenience not only to the petitioner but also to her son;

¶18

(d) The husband is not giving any maintenance, either to the wife or to the minor child;

¶19

(e) The petitioner is residing at Salem within the jurisdiction of the Family Court, Salem.

¶20

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

¶21

The respondent, though served has not entered appearance, either in person or through counsel and therefore, this Court has proceeded to hear the petitioner's counsel.

¶22

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶23

The reasons referred above have considerable force and taking note of the facts that the husband has not been discharging his duties by giving maintenance to his wife and child, the request for transfer is justified.

¶24

Accordingly, the Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is allowed. No Costs. Consequently, the connected Civil Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶25

Sd/-

¶26

Assistant Registrar(CS-VIII)

¶27

// True Copy //

¶28

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶29

gba/ab

¶30

¶31

1.The Principal Judge, Family Court, Coimbator.

¶32

2.The District Family Court, Salem.

¶33

3.The Section Officer,

¶34

VR Section, Madras High Court, Chennai.

¶35

+1cc to Mr.R.Chandrasekaran, Advocate Sr.No.13272

¶36

Tr. C.M.P. No.15 of 2022 and C.M.P.No.467 of 2022

¶37

NK(CO) RVM(16/03/2022)

¶38

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

Vivegaa Arumugam v. L.Subramania Prakash

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vivegaa Arumugam v. L.Subramania Prakash

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

P. Deepika Vs v .Palpandian

R. Revathi Vs R. Vinothkumar

K.Girija Vs v.Partheeban

The Branch Manager Vs Nazeerkhan

G.v.Kamalammal (Deceased) Vs Dharmaraya Pillai Thanneer Pandal

Mallika Vs Paramasivam