Allowed

Indhumathi v. Suresh

Madras HC29 Jul 2024TR CMP/198/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Wife sought transfer of her husband's matrimonial divorce petition from Sub Court, Ambasamudram to Poonamalle, citing hardship as a single woman residing in Chennai dependent on her parents. The court transferred the case to the Subordinate Court, Alandur, and allowed the petition.

What did the court decide?

HMOP.No.106 of 2023 (renumbered H.M.O.P.No.80 of 2024) withdrawn from Sub Court, Ambasamudram and transferred to Subordinate Court, Alandur.

Indhumathi Vs Suresh — Matrimonial and Divorce | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

Tr.C.M.P.No.198 of 2024

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 29.07.2024

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR

¶6

Tr.C.M.P.No.198 of 2024 and C.M.P.No.3857 of 2024

¶7

Indhumathi ... Petitioner

¶8

Vs.

¶9

Suresh ... Respondent

¶10

PRAYER: Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition filed under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, to withdraw and transfer the HMOP No.106/2023 on the file of Sub Court, Ambasamudram to the file of the Sub

¶11

Court, Poonamalle.

¶12

For Petitioner : Mr.K.J.Sivakumar

¶13

For Respondent : Ms.D.Sagunthala

¶14

ORDER

¶15

The petitioner filed this transfer petition seeking transfer of HMOP.No.106 of 2023 (renumbered as H.M.O.P.No.80 of 2024) filed by

¶16

Page No.1 of 4

¶17

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

¶18

Tr.C.M.P.No.198 of 2024

¶19

her estranged husband/respondent from the file of the Sub Court, Ambasamudram to the file of the Sub Court, Poonamalle.

¶20

2.The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that marriage between petitioner and respondent solemnized on 17.02.2019 at Shri Sivasailanathar Temple, Sivasailam, Tenkasi District. After six months of marriage, the respondent/husband started to ill-treat and abuse the petitioner and the respondent was not a dutiful husband and not even fulfill basic needs of the petitioner. Finally, the petitioner was chased out from the matrimonial home. Now the petitioner is surviving on the support of her parents. He further submitted that the petitioner is residing in Chennai and it is very difficult for her to travel from Chennai to Ambasamudram. Hence, prays for transfer.

¶21

3.Considering the submissions and on perusal of the materials, it is seen that the petitioner is facing difficulty to travel from Chennai to Ambasamudram. Being a single woman, she is depending her parents for every financial needs.

¶22

Page No.2 of 4

¶23

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

¶24

Tr.C.M.P.No.198 of 2024

¶25

In view of the above, this Court withdraws HMOP.No.106 of 2023

¶26

(renumbered as H.M.O.P.No.80 of 2024) from the file of the Sub Court, Ambasamudram and transfers the same to the file of the Subordinate Court at Alandur. Accordingly, this transfer civil miscellaneous petition is allowed. Consequently, connected civil miscellaneous petition is closed. No costs.

¶27

29.07.2024

¶28

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

¶29

Jer To

¶30

1.The Sub Judge Sub Court, Ambasamudram.

¶31

2.The Sub Judge Sub Court, Alandur.

¶32

M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.

¶33

Page No.3 of 4

¶34

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

¶35

Tr.C.M.P.No.198 of 2024

¶36

Jer

¶37

Tr.C.M.P.No.198 of 2024 and C.M.P.No.3857 of 2024

¶38

29.07.2024

¶39

Page No.4 of 4

¶40

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

Indhumathi v. Suresh

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Indhumathi v. Suresh

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

Murthy Vs Y. Rajeevi

Banupriya Vs R. Govindaraj

Murthy Vs Y.Rajeevi

G.Namgiri Lakshmi Vs v.Gowtham Gupta

Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd, Vs Phoolvathi Dharambir Aggarwal (Died)

Nithya Vinayakum Vs J.Narendran