Dismissed

Dhanalakshmi, v. Manikandan

Madras HC16 Nov 2022TR CMP(MD)/682/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madurai Bench of Madras High Court dismissed a transfer petition filed by a wife seeking to move matrimonial proceedings from the I Additional District and Sessions Court, Madurai, to the Principal District Court, Sivagangai. The Court held that transfer was not warranted despite the petitioner's lack of funds, as the children resided with the respondent husband in the district of the original

What did the court decide?

The Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

Dhanalakshmi, Vs Manikandan — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

Tr.C.M.P(MD)No.682 of 2022

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 16.11.2022

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI

¶6

Tr.C.M.P(MD)No.682 of 2022 and C.M.P(MD) No.10872 of 2022

Dhanalakshmi

... Petitioner

-Vs-

1.Manikandan 2.Alagarsamy

¶11

... Respondents

¶12

Prayer: Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition filed under Section 24 of C.P.C., to withdraw G.W.O.P.No.221 of 2022 on the file of the I Additional District and Sessions Court, Madurai and transfer the same to the Principal District Court, Sivagangai District.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.E.Balasubramanian

¶14

O R D E R

¶15

The wife filed this Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition

¶16

to transfer G.W.O.P.No.221 of 2022, which is pending on the file of the I Additional District and Sessions Court, Madurai to the Principal District Court, Sivagangai.

¶17

1/5

¶18

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

¶19

Tr.C.M.P(MD)No.682 of 2022

¶20

2.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the marriage between the petitioner and the first respondent husband was solemnized on 14.06.2010 and out of the wedlock, they were blessed with three children. Subsequently, due to some misunderstanding, they separated. The husband filed G.W.O.P.No.221 of 2022 before the I Additional District and Sessions Court, Madurai. S ince the petitioner/wife is a resident of Sivagangai, she filed this present Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition to transfer the proceedings in G.W.O.P.No.221 of 2022 from the file of the I Additional District and Sessions Court, Madurai to the file of the Principal District Court, Sivagangai.

¶21

3.The learned counsel further submits that one of the children was forcibly taken by the husband and also she filed Habeas Corpus Petition before this Court and this Court was not entertained the petition. However, this Court permitted the parties to work out their remedy before the Civil Court. Therefore, the respondent filed

¶22

2/5

¶23

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

¶24

Tr.C.M.P(MD)No.682 of 2022

¶25

above

¶26

above G.W.O.P.No.221 of 2022 before the Principal District Court, Madurai. Now the petitioner by claiming that she is having no means and no support to attend the Court proceedings at Madurai has filed this application. It is also confessed by the petitioner's counsel that the children are with the respondent husband.

¶27

4.Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and perused the materials placed on record.

¶28

5.Admittedly, G.W.O.P.No.221 of 2022 was filed by the

¶29

respondent before the I Additional District and Sessions Court, Madurai. The parties are having three children and all these children are with the respondent husband and they are taken care of by the respondent alone.The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Amitha Shah vs- Virendar Lal Shah , reported in (2003)10 SCC 609, has held that the convenience of the wife and more particularly the child must be taken into account while deciding the petition for transfer. In the present case on hand, the children are with the

¶30

3/5

¶31

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

¶32

Tr.C.M.P(MD)No.682 of 2022

¶33

respondent /husband.

¶34

6.In view of the above, this Court is not inclined to entertain this Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition. Accordingly, this Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶35

16.11.2022

¶36

Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No vrn

¶37

¶38

1.I Additional District and Sessions Court, Madurai 2.The Record Keeper, V.R.Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

¶39

4/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶40

Tr.C.M.P(MD)No.682 of 2022

¶41

B.PUGALENDHI, J.

¶42

vrn

¶43

Order made in Tr.C.M.P(MD)No.682 of 2022 and C.M.P(MD) No.10872 of 2022

¶44

16.11.2022

¶45

5/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Dhanalakshmi, v. Manikandan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dhanalakshmi, v. Manikandan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Cycil, Vs Jeyakumar (Died), 1. R. Emili Jeyakumar

R. Pandian, Vs K.S.Palanisamy

Birundhadevi Vs Gopalakrishnan

M.Jeyaraj Vs K.R.Prem Kumar

Lakshmi Ammal Vs Nallathambi

Sudhir Chandrakumar Vs L.J.Sajam