The Madurai Bench allowed a transfer petition seeking to move divorce proceedings from Family Court, Tirunelveli, to Family Court, Thoothukudi. The court prioritized the wife's convenience and residence in making the transfer order.
Proceedings in H.M.O.P.No.137 of 2020 transferred from Family Court, Tirunelveli to Family Court, Thoothukudi.
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.195 of 2022
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 27.07.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI
TR.C.M.P(MD).No.195 of 2022 and C.M.P(MD).No.3516 of 2022
M.Saranya ... Petitioner versus A.Sethuramalingam ... Respondent
Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed under Section 24 of C.P.C, to withdraw the case in H.M.O.P.No.137 of 2020 on the file of the Family Court, Tirunelveli and transfer the same to the Family Court, Thoothukudi.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Rajeshkanna
For Respondent : Mr.Siva Surya Nanayanan
1/6
TR.C.M.P(MD).No.195 of 2022
ORDER
This Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition has been filed seeking transfer of the proceedings in H.M.O.P.No.137 of 2020 from the file of the Family Court, Tirunelveli to the file of the Family Court, Thoothukudi.
3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the distance between Madathur and Tirunelveli is around 65 kms and it is very difficult for the petitioner to travel such a long distance for appearing before the Family Court, Tirunelveli, for each and every hearing.
2/6
TR.C.M.P(MD).No.195 of 2022
4.The learned Counsel for the respondent has raised his objection to
the relief sought for by the petitioner.
5.The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Amitha Shah vs- Virendar Lal Shah , reported (2003)10 SCC 609 has held that the convenience of the wife and more so of the child must be taken into account while deciding the petition for transfer and in the case of Rajani Kishor Paradeshi Vs Kishor Babulal Paradeshi reported in (2005) 12 SCC 237 , the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that in such type of transfer petitions, the convenience of the wife is to be preferred over the convenience of the husband.
6.This Court being satisfied with the reasons stated in the affidavit filed in support of this petition and also taking into consideration that the convenience of wife is to be taken into consideration at the time of considering transfer petitions as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the judgments cited supra, is inclined to allow the present petition.
3/6
TR.C.M.P(MD).No.195 of 2022
7.In the light of the above, this transfer civil miscellaneous petition stands allowed with the following directions:
(i) The proceedings in H.M.O.P.No.137 of 2020 on
the file of the Family Court, Tirunelveli is withdrawn and ordered to be transferred to the file of the Family Court, Thoothukudi.
(ii)The learned Judge, Family Court, Tirunelveli, is directed to transmit the entire case records to the Family Court, Thoothukudi forthwith and the learned Judge, Family Court, Thoothukudi, who in turn, on receipt of the case, shall dispose of the same as expeditiously as possible.
No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
27.07.2022
Rmk/dsk Index : Yes / No Internet: Yes / No To
1.The Judge, Family Court, Tirunelveli. 2.The Judge, Family Court, Thoothukudi.
4/6
TR.C.M.P(MD).No.195 of 2022
5/6
TR.C.M.P(MD).No.195 of 2022
B.PUGALENDHI, J.
Rmk/dsk
TR.C.M.P(MD).No.195 of 2022
27.07.2022
6/6
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Family Court hearing in Tirunelveli should be transferred to Thoothukudi due to the wife's residence and travel difficulty.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Amitha Shah vs Virendar Lal ShahExplained¶21
Amitha Shah vs- Virendar Lal Shah (2003)10 SCC 609 · Who else cites this
Rajani Kishor Paradeshi Vs Kishor Babulal ParadeshiExplained¶21
Rajani Kishor Paradeshi Vs Kishor Babulal Paradeshi (2005) 12 SCC 237 · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
M.Saranya
A.Sethuramalingam
B.Pugalendi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
