Allowed

M. Kowsalya Devi v. M. Pandiyarajan

Madras HC19 Jul 2023TR CMP/367/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge allowed the Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition to withdraw the pending divorce proceeding (HMOP No. 43 of 2022) from the Principal Sub Court at Dindigul and transfer it to the Sub Court at Tambaram, Chennai. The transfer was granted due to the petitioner's long commute distance and physical disability, ensuring convenience in attending hearings.

What did the court decide?

Allowance of Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition; withdrawal of HMOP No. 43 of 2022 from Principal Sub Court, Dindigul; transfer of the same to Sub Court, Tambaram, Chennai.

M. Kowsalya Devi Vs M. Pandiyarajan — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Madras HC (2023)

¶1

Tr.CMP.No. 367of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 19.07.2023

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN

¶6

Tr.C.M.P. No. 367 of 2023 and C.M.P. No. 7917 of 2023

¶7

M. Kowsalya .. Petitioner

¶8

Versus

¶9

M. Pandiyarajan .. Respondent

¶10

Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition filed under Section 24 of Civil Procedure Code, to withdraw the HMOP. No. 43 of 2022 pending on the file of the Principal Sub Court, Dindigul District and to transfer the same to the Sub Court, Tambaram.

¶11

O R D E R

¶12

This petition is filed to withdraw HMOP.No. 43 of 2022 from the file of

¶13

Principal Sub Court, Dindigul District and to transfer the same to the Sub Court, Tambaram, Chennai. The marriage between the petitioner/wife and https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 1/4

¶14

Tr.CMP.No. 367of 2023

¶15

respondent/husband was solemnized on 11.11.2015. Out of their wedlock, the petitioner/wife gave birth a female child, namely, Anunitha. Thereafter, there was some difference of opinion between the petitioner and the respondent. Hence, the respondent/husband filed a petition for divorce in HMOP. No. 43 of 2022 on the file of Principal Sub Court, Dindigul under Section 13(1)(a) of the Hindu Marriage Act.

¶16

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is working in a software company at Kelampakkam, Chennai and also she is residing in the above said address, which is far away from Dindigul District and she is also a physically challenged peron having 60% disability caused in an accident at eight year old as well as she has four year old daughter. Therefore, she cannot travel from Chennai to Dindigul District to attend the Court hearings on a regular basis. Hence, he seeks transfer the case from Principal Sub Court, Dindigul to Sub Court, Tambaram.

¶17

The learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner who has

¶18

no support from her family, is unable to attend the hearings of the case. Since the distance from Chennai to Dindigul is more than 200 Kms, the petitioner seeks withdrawal and transfer the case from the file of Principal Sub Court, https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 2/4

¶19

Tr.CMP.No. 367of 2023

¶20

Dindigul to the Sub Court, Tambaram, Chennai, mainly on the ground of convenience of the petitioner/wife.

¶21

In a petition filed by the husband for divorce, the convenience of

¶22

wife is relevant. Having regard to the facts narrated in the affidavit filed in support of this petition, this Court is fully convinced that the petitioner should not be put to much inconvenience by traveling such a long distance. Hence, this Court is inclined to allow this petition. Accordingly, HMOP.No. 43 of 2022 pending on the file of the Princiipal Sub Court, Dindigul, is hereby withdrawn and transfer the same to the Sub Court, Tambaram, Chennai.

¶23

This Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is allowed. No costs.

¶24

Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶25

19.07.2023

¶26

Index:Yes/No Speaking order : Yes/No Neutral Citation : Yes/No MSM

¶27

¶28

1.The Principal Sub Court, Dindigul District.

¶29

2.The Sub Court, Tambaram, Chennai.

¶30

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

¶31

3/4

¶32

Tr.CMP.No. 367of 2023

¶33

V.BHAVANI SUBBAROYAN, J.

¶34

MSM

¶35

Tr.C.M.P. No. 367 of 2023

¶36

19.07.2023

¶37

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

¶38

4/4

M. Kowsalya Devi v. M. Pandiyarajan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M. Kowsalya Devi v. M. Pandiyarajan

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

Siva Sankari Vs Venkatabalan

V.C.Jayaraman Vs Glen Williams

M/s. Naryana and Co. Vs M/s. M.R.M. Ramasamy Chettiar and Co. Ltd.

N.Tamilarasi Vs Senthil Kumar

V.Suresh Vs Sarojini @ Sathya

G. Anand Vs G.M. Moneesha