Allowed

Dhanalakshmi v. G.Shankar

Madras HC7 Dec 2022TR CMP/475/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Madras transferred a matrimonial case (HMOP 727 of 2020) from the Family Court at Tiruppur to the Additional Sub Court at Kumbakonam. The transfer was granted to accommodate the petitioner, an unemployed mother residing with parents, who faces travel difficulties living far from the original venue.

What did the court decide?

HMOP No.727 of 2020 transferred from Family Court, Tiruppur, to Additional Sub Court, Kumbakonam; case papers to be transmitted within four weeks.

Dhanalakshmi Vs G.Shankar — Matrimonial and Divorce | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

Tr.CMP No.475 of 2022

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 07-12-2022

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM

¶6

Tr.C.M.P.No.475 of 2022

¶7

and C.M.P.No.8487 of 2022

Dhanalakshmi

.. Petitioner

vs.

G.Shankar .. Respondent

¶12

PRAYER : This Transfer CMP is filed under Section 24 of the Civil Procedure Code, to withdraw the case in HMOP No.727 of 2020 from the file of the Family Court at Tiruppur and transfer the same to the Additional Sub Court at Kumbakonam.

¶13

For Petitioner : Ms.M.Priyadharshini For Respondent : Left

¶14

1/11

¶15

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶16

O R D E R

¶17

Tr.CMP No.475 of 2022

¶18

The Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed to withdraw the

¶19

case in HMOP No.727 of 2020 on the file of the Family Court at Tiruppur

¶20

and transfer the same to the file of the Additional Sub Court at Kumbakonam.

¶21

The marriage between the petitioner and the respondent was solemnised on 20.08.2012 as per Hindu Rites and Customs. Two female children were born from and out of the wedlock. Due to misunderstanding, the petitioner and the respondent are living separately.

¶22

The learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner-

¶23

wife and her two female children are now residing along with her parents and she is unemployed. The respondent-husband instituted a case in HMOP No.727 of 2020 for dissolution of marriage on the file of the Family Court

¶24

2/11

¶25

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶26

Tr.CMP No.475 of 2022

¶27

at Tiruppur. Since the petitioner is the dependant of her parents and she has to take care of her two female children, she is not in a position to travel all along from Kumbakonam to Tiruppur and contest the case filed by the respondent before the Family Court at Tiruppur.

¶28

The principles regarding transfer petitions, more specifically in the matters of matrimonial cases, are well settled through the three decisions of the High Court of Madras, in the following cases:-

¶29

(i) The Hon'ble Division Bench of the High Court of Madras in W.A.No.1181 of 2009, dated 09.07.2010, wherein in paragraphs-21 and 22, it has been observed as under:-

¶30

''21. The domicile or citizenship of the

¶31

opposite party is immaterial in a case like this. In

¶32

case the marriage was solemnized under Hindu Law marital relationship is governed by the provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act. Therefore,

¶33

Section 19 has to be given a purposeful

¶34

3/11

¶35

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶36

Tr.CMP No.475 of 2022

¶37

interpretation. It is the residence of the wife, which

¶38

determines the question of jurisdiction, in case the proceeding was initiated at the instance of the wife.

¶39

While considering a provision like

¶40

Section 19 (iii-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, the objects and reasons which prompted the parliament to incorporate such a provision has also to be taken note of. Sub Clause (iii-a) was inserted in Section 19 with a specific purpose. Experience is the best teacher. The Government found the difficulties faced by women in the matter of initiation of matrimonial proceedings. The report submitted by the Law Commission as well as National Commission for Women, underlying the need for such amendment so as to enable the women to approach the nearest jurisdictional court

¶41

4/11

¶42

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶43

Tr.CMP No.475 of 2022

¶44

to redress their matrimonial grievances, were also taken note of by the Government. Therefore such a beneficial provision meant for the women of our Country should be given a meaningful interpretation by Courts.''

¶45

(ii) In yet another case in Tr.CMP.Nos.138 and 139 of 2006,

¶46

dated 30.08.2006, the High Court of Madras has considered the following judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India:-

¶47

Aresh Satya Goel [(2000) 9 SCC 255] , when the wife pleaded that she was unable to bear the traveling expenses and even to travel alone and stay at Bombay, the Supreme Court ordered transfer of

¶48

proceedings.

¶49

Chander Heera [(2000) 10 SCC 304] , the Hon'ble

¶50

Supreme Court has held that where the petitioner's

¶51

5/11

¶52

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶53

Tr.CMP No.475 of 2022

¶54

wife has pleaded lack of money, the same has to be considered.

¶55

(3) In the case of Lalita A.Ranga vs. Ajay

¶56

Champalal Ranga [( 2000) 9 SCC 355] , the wife has filed a petition to transfer the proceedings initiated by the husband for divorce, at Bombay. The place of residence of the wife was at Jaipur, Rajasthan. In that case, the petitioner is having a small child and that she pleaded difficulty in going all the way from Jaipur to Bombay to contest the proceedings from time to time. Considering the distance and the difficulties faced by the wife, the

¶57

Supreme Court has allowed the transfer petition.

¶58

(4) In a decision in Archana Singh vs.

¶59

Surendra Bahadur Singh [(2005) 12 SCC 395] ,

¶60

the wife has sought for transfer of matrimonial

¶61

proceedings and a divorce petition has been filed by

¶62

6/11

¶63

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶64

Tr.CMP No.475 of 2022

¶65

the respondent's husband at Baikunthpur to be transferred to Allahabad, where the petitioner's wife was residing, on the ground that it would be difficult for her to undertake such long distance journey, particularly in circumstances, in which she finds that the proceedings under 5 Section 125 Cr.P.C. was already pending before the Family Court, Allahabad. Considering the difficulties faced by the wife and also the long distance journey, the Honourable Supreme Court was pleased to order transfer of the proceedings to Allahabad.”

¶66

(iii) In a decision made in TR.CMP(MD)No.108 of 2010, dated 03.03.2011, the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, wherein in paragraph-18, it has been observed as below:-

¶67

''18. It is true that section 19 of the Hindu

¶68

Marriage Act, has been amended by insertion of proviso of (iii)(a) to section 19. Of Course, this amended section

¶69

7/11

¶70

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶71

Tr.CMP No.475 of 2022

¶72

19(iii)(a) gives special preference to the wife to file a petition or defending the case of the husband before the Court within whose jurisdiction she resides. The intention of the Legislator is to safe-guard the interest and rights of the women, who are being subjected to harassment and cruelty. But this special preference conferred under section 19(iii)(a) of the Hindu Marriage Act shall not be used to wreck vengeance on the husband. There must be a justifiable cause to select the jurisdiction of the Court where she resides.''

¶73

Considering the facts and circumstances, this Court is inclined to consider the case of the petitioner. Accordingly, the HMOP No.727 of 2020 pending on the file of the Family Court at Tiruppur stands transferred to the Additional Sub Court at Kumbakonam forthwith. The Family Court at Tiruppur is directed to transmit the case papers to the Additional Sub Court at Kumbakonam, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a

¶74

8/11

¶75

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶76

Tr.CMP No.475 of 2022

¶77

copy of this order.

¶78

With the abovesaid directions, the Transfer Civil

¶79

Miscellaneous Petition stands allowed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶80

07-12-2022

¶81

Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order. Internet : Yes/No. Index: Yes/No. Svn

¶82

To 1.The Judge, Family Court at Tiruppur.

¶83

2.The Additional Sub Judge, Additional Sub Court at Kumbakonam.

¶84

9/11

¶85

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶86

Tr.CMP No.475 of 2022

¶87

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.

¶88

Svn

¶89

Tr.CMP No.475 of 2022

¶90

10/11

¶91

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶92

Tr.CMP No.475 of 2022

¶93

07-12-2022

¶94

11/11

¶95

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Dhanalakshmi v. G.Shankar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dhanalakshmi v. G.Shankar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Archana Vs Ram.R.v.

D.Panjavaranam Vs K.Hemant Kumar

R. Bharathi Vs E. Rajeshkumar

M.Ramya Vs N.Sathish Kumar

S.Dinakaran Vs K.Varadan

S. Jothi Vs P. Saravanan