Allowed

G.Anandha Lakshmi, v. R.Ananda Krishnan

Madras HC25 Nov 2022TR CMP(MD)/236/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court allowed a transfer petition to move a divorce case from Poonamallee to Nanguneri, citing the Supreme Court's principle that a wife's convenience outweighs the husband's in transfer matters.

What did the court decide?

The Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is allowed. The divorce proceedings are withdrawn from Poonamallee and transferred to Subordinate Judge, Nanguneri, to be tried with H.M.O.P.No.12 of 2022.

G.Anandha Lakshmi, Vs R.Ananda Krishnan — Matrimonial and Divorce | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

TR.C.M.P(MD).No.236 of 2022

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 25.11.2022

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI

¶6

TR.C.M.P(MD).No.236 of 2022 and C.M.P(MD).No.4068 of 2022

¶7

G.Anandha Lakshmi ... Petitioner

¶8

versus

¶9

R.Ananda Krishnan ... Respondent

¶10

Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition filed under Section 24 C.P.C. to withdraw H.M.O.P.No.140 of 2022 on the file of the Subordinate Court, Poonamallee and transfer the same to the file of Subordinate Judge, Nanguneri, Tirunelveli District and try along with H.M.O.P.No.12 of 2022.

¶11

For Petitioner : Mr.J.Parekhkumar For Respondent : Mr.N.S.Karthikeyan

¶12

ORDER

¶13

This Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed seeking

¶14

transfer of H.M.O.P.No.140 of 2022 from the file of the Subordinate Court, Poonamallee, to the file of Subordinate Judge, Nanguneri,

¶15

1/6

¶16

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

¶17

TR.C.M.P(MD).No.236 of 2022

¶18

Tirunelveli District.

¶19

The petitioner herein is the wife and the respondent herein is the husband. The marriage between them was solemnized on 18.04.2019, as per Hindu Rites and Customs. Due to some misunderstanding, now, both are living separately. Thereafter, the respondent has filed H.M.O.P.No.140 of 2020 before the Sub Court, Poonamallee, for divorce. Subsequently, the petitioner has also filed a petition in H.M.O.P.No.12 of 2022 before the learned Subordinate Judge, Nanguneri, for restitution of conjugal rights. Now, the petitioner is living along with her aged parents at Kalakad. Since she is not having sufficient means and there is no one to accompany her, she finds it difficult to travel from Kalakad to Poonamallee. Hence, she filed the present Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition to transfer the case in H.M.O.P.No.140 of 2022 from the file of the Subordinate Court, Poonamallee, to the file of the Subordinate Judge, Nanguneri, Tirunelveli District.

¶20

2/6

¶21

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

¶22

TR.C.M.P(MD).No.236 of 2022

¶23

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that

¶24

the petitioner is living along with her aged parents at Kalakad. Since it is a remote village, she has to take different buses to reach Poonamallee, which is 750 kms away from her residence. Further, she is not having sufficient means and she also depends upon her parents to meet out her day-to-day expenses. Since there is no one to accompany her, she finds it difficult to travel from Kalakad to Poonamallee, for appearing before the Subordinate Court, Poonamallee, for each and every hearing. Therefore, she seeks transfer of H.M.O.P.No.140 of 2022 from the file of the Subordinate Court, Poonamallee, to the file of the Subordinate Judge, Nanguneri, Tirunelveli District, where she filed H.M.O.P.12 of 2022 for restitution of conjugal rights.

¶25

The learned counsel appearing for the respondent submits that the respondent is working at Gujarat and if the divorce petition is transferred to Sub Court, Nanguneri, it will be very difficult for him to travel and it would take minimum three days to reach Nanguneri.

¶26

3/6

¶27

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

¶28

TR.C.M.P(MD).No.236 of 2022

¶29

Therefore, instead of Sub Court, Nanguneri, he requests for any Court at Madurai or Tiruchirappalli.

¶30

The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Amitha Shah vsVirendar 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.

¶31

Though the learned counsel appearing for the respondent requests this Court to transfer H.M.O.P.No.140 of 2022 pending on the file of the Subordinate Court, Poonamallee, to any Court at Madurai or Tiruchirappalli, this Court, by taking into consideration that the convenience of wife is to be taken into consideration at the time of

¶32

4/6

¶33

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

¶34

TR.C.M.P(MD).No.236 of 2022

¶35

considering transfer petitions as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in

¶36

the judgments cited supra, is inclined to allow the present petition.

¶37

Accordingly, the Transfer Civil Miscellaneous petition stands allowed. The proceedings in H.M.O.P.No.140 of 2022 pending on the file of the Sub Court, Poonamallee, is withdrawn and ordered to be transferred to the file of the learned Subordinate Judge, Nanguneri, to be tried along with H.M.O.P.No.12 of 2022. The learned Subordinate Judge, Nanguneri, shall dispose of the cases as expeditiously as possible, without insisting on personal appearance of respondent, if he is represented by a Counsel. However, the respondent shall appear before the Sub Court, Nanguneri, as and when his presence is required by the Court. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶38

25.11.2022

¶39

Index : Yes / No Internet: Yes / No ogy 5/6

¶40

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

¶41

TR.C.M.P(MD).No.236 of 2022

B.PUGALENDHI, J.

ogy

The Subordinate Court, Poonamallee.

¶46

The learned Subordinate Judge, Nanguneri, Tirunelveli District

¶47

TR.C.M.P(MD).No.236 of 2022

¶48

25.11.2022

¶49

6/6

¶50

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

G.Anandha Lakshmi, v. R.Ananda Krishnan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

G.Anandha Lakshmi, v. R.Ananda Krishnan

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

Jothimani Vs Periyan (Died) 1.NALLAMMAL

J.Ramesh Kumar Vs K.Jeyapaul Kasi

Suganthy, Vs M.T.Godwin

S.K.Ramasamy Vs S.v.K.Ravichandran

Pavithra, Vs Gopalakrishnan

S. Maragatham, Vs Enokku alias Siren