A transfer petition was filed to move divorce proceedings from Pudukottai to Thanjavur. The High Court allowed the petition, citing the wife's residence and the principle that wife's convenience is a key consideration per Supreme Court jurisprudence.
Transfer of H.M.O.P.No.207 of 2021 from Principal Sub-Court Pudukottai to Principal Sub-Court Thanjavur.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
TR.C.M.P(MD).No.116 of 2022
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 06.07.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI
TR.C.M.P(MD).No.116 of 2022 and C.M.P(MD).No.2391 of 2022
Amutha Sudha ... Petitioner
versus
Venkatesan ... Respondent
Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed under Section 24 of C.P.C, to withdraw H.M.O.P.No.207 of 2021 pending on the file of the Principal Sub-Court, Pudukottai and transfer the same to the Principal SubCourt, Thanjavur.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Muthukrishnan For Respondent : No-appearance
1/5
TR.C.M.P(MD).No.116 of 2022
ORDER
This Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition has been filed seeking transfer of the proceedings in H.M.O.P.No. 207 of 2021 from the file of the Principal Sub-Court, Pudukottai to the Principal Sub-Court, Thanjavur.
3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the distance between Thanjavur and Pudukottai is around 50 kms and it is very difficult for the petitioner to travel such a long distance for appearing
2/5
TR.C.M.P(MD).No.116 of 2022
before the Principal Sub-Court, Pudukottai, for each and every hearing.
4.Though notice was ordered to the respondent, there is no representation for the respondent.
5.This Court, being satisfied with the reasons stated in the affidavit filed in support of this petition and also taking into consideration that it is well settled law that convenience of wife is to be taken into consideration at the time of considering transfer applications as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the judgment reported in 2008(9)SCC 353 (Arti Rani @ Pinki Devi and another Vs. Dharmendra Kumar Gupta), is inclined to allow the present petition.
6.In the light of the above, this transfer civil miscellaneous petition stands allowed. The proceedings in H.M.O.P.No. 207 of 2021 on the file of the Principal Sub-Court, Pudukottai, is withdrawn and ordered to be transferred to the file of the Principal Sub-Court, Thanjavur. The learned Principal Sub Judge, Pudukottai, is directed to transmit the entire case
3/5
TR.C.M.P(MD).No.116 of 2022
records to the Principal Sub-Court, Thanjavur forthwith and the learned Principal Sub Judge, Thanjavur, who in turn shall dispose of the same as expeditiously as possible. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
06.07.2022
ssb Index : Yes / No Internet: Yes / No
To
4/5
TR.C.M.P(MD).No.116 of 2022
B.PUGALENDHI, J.
ssb
TR.C.M.P(MD).No.116 of 2022
06.07.2022
5/5
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the transfer of divorce proceedings from Pudukottai to Thanjavur is warranted considering the petitioner's residence and travel difficulty.
Whether the convenience of the wife is a relevant factor in deciding transfer of matrimonial cases.
Whether the dispute should be transferred to the court in Thanjavur where the wife resides.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Arti Rani @ Pinki Devi and another Vs. Dharmendra Kumar GuptaExplained¶24
2008(9)SCC 353 (Arti Rani @ Pinki Devi and another Vs. Dharmendra Kumar Gupta) · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Amutha Sudha
Venkatesan
B.PUGALENDHI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
