Allowed

T.Ramya @ Bushma v. K.Sivasankaran

Madras HC7 Aug 2023TR CMP/325/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a matrimonial dispute, the High Court allowed a transfer petition under S. 24 CPC to move a divorce case from the Family Court, Pondicherry, to the Sub-Court, Maduranthakam, prioritizing the wife's convenience and her inability to attend Pondicherry court proceedings with her child.

What did the court decide?

H.M.O.P.No.369 of 2022 withdrawn from Family Court, Pondicherry and transferred to Sub-Court, Maduranthakam.

T.Ramya @ Bushma Vs K.Sivasankaran — Matrimonial and Divorce | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

Tr.C.M.P.No.325 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 07.08.2023

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN

¶5

TR C.M.P. No.325 of 2023 and C.M.P.No.7245 of 2023

¶6

T.Ramya @ Bushma ... Petitioner Vs. K.Sivasankaran ... Respondent

¶7

PRAYER: This Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed under Section 24 of Civil Procedure Code, 1908 to withdraw H.M.O.P.No.369 of 2022 pending of the file of the learned Family Court, Pondicherry and transfer the same to the file of the sub-Court, Maduranthakam and pass orders.

¶8

For Petitioner : Mr. K.Shyam Sunder For Respondent : Mr. E.Anbarasan

¶9

O R D E R

¶10

This Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition has been filed seeking to

¶11

withdraw H.M.O.P.No.369 of 2022 pending of the file of the learned Family Court, Pondicherry and transfer the same to the Sub-Court

¶12

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

¶13

¶14

Tr.C.M.P.No.325 of 2023

¶15

Maduranthakam for further proceedings.

¶16

The case of the petitioner is that she got married to the respondent on 01.12.2016 at Annai Lourdhu Mahal, Odiampet Main, Kanuvapet, Pondicherry as per the Hindu Rites and Rituals and due to the said wed lock one girl child was born to them. After marriage when the couple was residing in their matrimonial home. Due to the difference of opinion that arose between them, they both got separated and living separately since then. The respondent/ husband has filed a petition for divorce before the Family Court, Pondicherry in H.M.O.P.No.322 of 2018 on 12.07.2018, under Section 13(1)(i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and the same was dismissed on 10.12.2018. Thereafter, a fresh H.M.O.P.No. 369 of 2022 seeking divorce was filed. Hence, the petitioner has filed this petition seeking to transfer the petition filed by her husband in H.M.O.P.No. 369 of 2022 on the file of the Family court, Pondicherry to the Sub-Court, Mathuranthakam.

¶17

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that now the

¶18

petitioner is residing in a remote village at Chengalpet District along with her child who is hardly one and a half years old. Being a lady, the petitioner 2

¶19

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

¶20

Tr.C.M.P.No.325 of 2023

¶21

could not able to attend the Court proceedings in Family court, Pondicherry. Hence, she seeks to withdraw the H.M.O.P.No. 369 of 2022 from the file of the the Family court, Pondicherry and transfer the same to the Sub-Court, Madhuranthakam. If the case is transferred to Madhuranthakam, no prejudice would be caused to the respondent. Therefore, it will be appropriate to transfer the case filed by the husband.

¶22

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the respondent. Perused the materials available on record. It is well settled law that whenever, the transfer application is filed in matrimonial dispute, the convenience of the wife shall be given preference.

¶23

In view of the above submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and considering the facts and circumstances of the case and taking note of the fact that the petitioner cannot accompany her child during Court proceedings this Court is inclined to withdraw the H.M.O.P.No. 369 of 2022 from the file of the the Family court, Pondicherry and transfer to the Sub-Court, Maduranthakam.

¶24

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

¶25

¶26

Tr.C.M.P.No.325 of 2023

¶27

In the result, the Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is

¶28

allowed. The learned Judge of Sub-Court, Maduranthakam is directed to complete the proceedings as expeditiously as possible, since, already the pleading are completed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶29

07.08.2023

¶30

Index:Yes/No Internet:Yes/No Speaking Order/Non Speaking Order

¶31

gba

¶32

¶33

1.The Family Judge, Pondicherry.

¶34

The Sub-Court, Maduranthakam.

¶35

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

¶36

¶37

Tr.C.M.P.No.325 of 2023

¶38

V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN., J.

¶39

gba

¶40

TR C.M.P. No.325 of 2023 and C.M.P.No.7245 of 2023

¶41

07.08.2023

¶42

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

¶43

T.Ramya @ Bushma v. K.Sivasankaran

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

T.Ramya @ Bushma v. K.Sivasankaran

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Arunadevi Vs Saravanan

Subramani Vs Nallammal (Died) 1.Nallammal

R.Vasudevan Vs N.S.Kaleel

Aishwarya Vs a.Maheshwar

Dominic Amalraj Vs Elisabeth Mary

P.Shalini Devi Vs C.Munirathinaprabhu