Allowed

S.Sahana v. D.Sakthi Narayanan

Madras HC2 Jul 2024TR CMP/795/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a petition under Section 24 CCP to withdraw divorce proceedings O.P.No.136 of 2023 from Tiruvannamalai and transfer them to Chennai to be consolidated with O.P.No.3419 of 2023. This decision prioritized the petitioner's convenience as a working doctor in Chennai over the respondent's location abroad, establishing protocols for his future appearance.

What did the court decide?

O.P.No.136 of 2023 withdrawn and transferred to VI Additional Family Court, Chennai to be heard along with O.P.No.3419 of 2023.

S.Sahana Vs D.Sakthi Narayanan — Matrimonial and Divorce | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

Transfer C.M.P.No.795 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 02.07.2024

¶4

Coram

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE V. LAKSHMINARAYANAN

¶6

Transfer C.M.P No.795 of 2023 & C.M.P.No.19287 of 2023

¶7

Dr.S.Sahana ... Petitioner

¶8

-Versus-

¶9

D.Sakthi Narayanan ... Respondent

¶10

Transfer civil miscellaneous petition filed under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure to withdraw and transfer the Divorce petition in OP.No.136 of 2023 on the file of Family Court, Tiruvannamalai to try along with O.P.No.3419 of 2023 pending before VI Additional Family Court, Chennai

¶11

For Petitioner : Mr.Uma Shankar.D For Respondent : Mr.N.Ram Kumar for Mr.Anirudh Krishnan

¶12

ORDER

¶13

The petitioner is the wife and the respondent is the husband. The

¶14

petitioner and the respondent entered into matrimony on 25.04.2022 at Puducherry. Thereafter, they started living at Tiruvannamalai. Due to disputes

¶15

and differences, the parties have separated. The wife went back to Bangalore,

¶16

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 1 of 6

¶17

Transfer C.M.P.No.795 of 2023

¶18

where she was originally working.

¶19

The husband initiated O.P.No.136 of 2023 on the file of the Family Court at Tiruvannamalai seeking divorce on the ground of cruelty. The wife, after having been served with summons, had initiated a petition for divorce on the grounds of cruelty in O.P.No.3419 of 2023 before the VI Additional Family Court at Chennai.

¶20

The wife would state that she has taken employment in Chennai and is currently residing here. She would state that she is finding it difficult to travel from Chennai to Tiruvannamalai to attend the hearing. Therefore, she requests a transfer.

¶21

Notice was ordered in the application on 25.08.2023. On service of

¶22

notice, the husband entered appearance through Mr. N.Ram Kumar.

¶23

Mr.N.Ram Kumar would submit that the husband is now currently residing in Canada, where he is working for Cognizant Technology Solutions. He would state that the proceeding in Chennai was initiated after the

¶24

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 2 of 6

¶25

Transfer C.M.P.No.795 of 2023

¶26

proceeding had been initiated at Thiruvannamalai. He would point out, from the records that had been produced by him, that the wife even now is shown as working in Rainbow Children's Hospital at Marathahalli in Bangalore. He would state that the entire purpose of this petition is to harass the husband, get the proceedings transferred to Chennai, and cause him more trouble.

¶27

Heard both sides and went through the records.

¶28

The relationship between the parties is not in dispute, nor are the proceedings initiated by the respective parties seeking divorce. The wife originally was residing in Bangalore as is seen from the service of summons in O.P.136 of 2023. Subsequently, the wife moved to Chennai and invoked the jurisdiction of the Family Court, Chennai to present the divorce petition. The wife who is a working doctor, as seen from the records, would find it very difficult to travel from Chennai to Tiruvannamalai for every hearing.

¶29

On the contrary, the husband not being in India, if the case is transferred to Chennai or continued in Tiruvannamalai, it does not make a difference to him.

¶30

3 of 6

¶31

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

¶32

Transfer C.M.P.No.795 of 2023

¶33

Taking into consideration the convenience of the wife, the proceedings in O.P.No.136 of 2023 on the file of the Family Court at Tiruvannamalai is withdrawn and is transferred to the file of the VI Additional Family Court, Chennai to be heard and disposed of along with O.P.No.3419 of 2023. The VI Additional Family Court, Chennai need not insist upon the appearance of the husband for every hearing. For essential hearing alone, he should be present. For all other hearings, he may be represented through a counsel.

¶34

With the above direction, this transfer civil miscellaneous petition is allowed. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶35

02.07.2024

¶36

¶37

Index : yes / no Neutral Citation : yes / no Speaking / Non Speaking Order

¶38

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 4 of 6

¶39

Transfer C.M.P.No.795 of 2023

¶40

¶41

1.The Family Court, Tiruvannamalai

¶42

The VI Additional Family Court, Chennai

¶43

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

¶44

5 of 6

¶45

Transfer C.M.P.No.795 of 2023

¶46

V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN, J.

¶47

¶48

Transfer C.M.P.No.795 of 2023

¶49

02.07.2024

¶50

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 6 of 6

S.Sahana v. D.Sakthi Narayanan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Sahana v. D.Sakthi Narayanan

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

Chitra Vs D.Vijayakumar

M.Bhuvaneswari Vs v.Murali Sundaram

Kavitha Vs M/S.Vox Realties Private Limited

G.S.Anandraj Vs Dr.K.Ramani

Vijaya Raghavan (Deceased) Vs Ameerunnissa Begum Sabiba

K.M.Saravana Kumar Vs Uthra Madhavan