Allowed¶48

S. Faizunnisa v. a. Farooq Moosa

Madras HC9 Oct 2025TR CMP/162/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Transfer of matrimonial suit under Section 24 CPC on ground of wife's convenience; N.C.V.Aishwarya vs. A.S.Saravana Karthik (MANU/SC/1211/2022 : 2022 Live Law (SC) 627) relied on; observation on Section 19(iii)(a) Hindu Marriage Act; dissolution of marriage suit O.S.No.98 of 2022 shifted from Additional District Munsif Court, Aruppukottai (Virudhunagar) to District Munsif Court, Perundurai (Erode); respondent set ex parte after completed notice; Muslim marriage dated 23.09.2018; petition allowed with no costs; connected C.M.P.No.3571 of 2023 closed.

What did the court decide?

Transfer petition allowed: O.S. No.98 of 2022 withdrawn from the Additional District Munsif Court, Aruppukottai, Virudhunagar District and transferred to the file of the District Munsif Court, Perundurai, Erode District; no costs; connected C.M.P. closed. ¶48

S. Faizunnisa Vs a. Farooq Moosa — Matrimonial and Divorce | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶48

Issue for consideration

Whether O.S.No.98 of 2022 (husband's suit for dissolution of marriage) pending before the Additional District Munsif Court, Aruppukottai, Virudhunagar District should be withdrawn and transferred to the District Munsif Court, Perundurai, Erode District in view of the petitioner-wife's convenience and hardship.

¶28

Court's answer

Applying the proposition in N.C.V.Aishwarya and this Court's own earlier observation, the convenience of the wife has to be considered while transferring a case from one Court to another, and consequently there can be no impediment to allowing the transfer petition as prayed for.

¶44

Ratio / Principle

The Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is allowed; O.S. No.98 of 2022 is withdrawn from the Additional District Munsif Court, Aruppukottai, Virudhunagar District and transferred to the District Munsif Court, Perundurai, Erode District, with no costs, and the connected Civil Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶48

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Transfer petition under Section 24 CPC by wife-petitioner S.Faizunnisa seeking withdrawal of her husband A.Farooq Moosa's dissolution suit O.S.No.98 of 2022 from the Additional District Munsif Court, Aruppukottai, Virudhunagar District to the District Munsif Court, Perundurai, Erode District. The parties married on 23.09.2018 at Perundurai as per Muslim Rites and Customs; the petitioner resides at Perundurai, has lost her parents and is financially struggling, making attendance at every hearing at Aruppukottai difficult. Service of notice on the respondent stood completed; he did not appear and was set ex parte. Relying on N.C.V.Aishwarya vs. A.S.Saravana Karthik (MANU/SC/1211/2022 : 2022 Live Law (SC) 627), paras 9 and 10 (in matrimonial matters the wife's convenience generally governs transfer), and a Madurai Bench decision (TR.CMP(MD)No.108 of 2010, dated 03.03.2011) noting that the Section 19(iii)(a) Hindu Marriage Act preference protects wives, M. Jothiraman, J. found merit in the petition and allowed it on 09.10.2025: O.S. No.98 of 2022 transferred to Perundurai, no costs, connected C.M.P. closed.

¶1

Tr.C.M.P.No.162 of 2023 and C.M.P.No.3571 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 09.10.2025

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN

¶5

Tr.CMP.No.162 of 2023 and C.M.P.No.3571 of 2023

¶6

S.Faizunnisa, W/o.Farooq Moosa, No.24, Raja Street, Perundurai, Erode District.

¶7

... Petitioner

¶8

¶9

A.Farooq Moosa, S/o. Abdul Wahab, No.127/11A, Anna Nagar 2^nd Street, Kariyapatti, Virudhunagar District.

¶10

... Respondent

¶11

Prayer :- Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition filed under Section 24 of the CPC, to withdraw O.S. No.98 of 2022 pending before the Additional District Munsif Court, Aruppukottai, Virudhunagar District and transfer the same to the file of the District Munsif Court, Perundurai, Erode District.

¶12

Page 1 of 7

¶13

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

¶14

Tr.C.M.P.No.162 of 2023 and C.M.P.No.3571 of 2023

¶15

For Petitioner : Mr.C.Munusamy For Respondent : No appearance

¶16

O R D E R

¶17

This petition has been filed to withdraw O.S. No.98 of 2022

¶18

from the file of the Additional District Munsif Court, Aruppukottai, Virudhunagar District and to transfer the same to the file of the District Munsif Court, Perundurai, Erode District.

¶19

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner.

¶20

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would

¶21

submit that the respondent has not chosen to enter appearance before this Court despite service of notice.

¶22

It is seen that service of notice has been completed on the

¶23

respondent and the name of the respondent is also printed in the cause

¶24

list today. The respondent was called absent and set ex parte .

¶25

Page 2 of 7

¶26

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

¶27

Tr.C.M.P.No.162 of 2023 and C.M.P.No.3571 of 2023

¶28

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner got married to the respondent on 23.09.2018 at Arunachala Gounder Thirumana Mandapam, Kandhampalayam Pirivu, Perundurai as per Muslim Rites and Customs. The respondent / husband filed a petition in O.S.No.98 of 2022 before the Additional District Munsif Court, Aruppukottai, Virudhunagar District, for dissolution of marriage and the same is pending adjudication. The petitioner is residing in Perundurai and her parents are no more and she is financially struggling a lot. In such circumstances, it is very difficult for the petitioner to travel from Perundurai to Aruppukottai for attending each and every hearing of the case. Therefore, the case in O.S.No.98 of 2022 may be withdrawn from the file of the Additional District Munsif Court, Aruppukottai, Virudhunagar District, and transferred to the file of the District Munsif Court, Perundurai, Erode District.

¶29

I have gone through the affidavit filed in support this petition and I find merit in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶30

Page 3 of 7

¶31

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

¶32

Tr.C.M.P.No.162 of 2023 and C.M.P.No.3571 of 2023

¶33

At this juncture, it may be apposite to cite the judgment of

¶34

the Hon'ble Apex Court in N.C.V.Aishwarya vs. A.S.Saravana Karthik (MANU/SC/1211/2022 : 2022 Live Law (SC) 627) held at paras 9 and 10, which reads as under:-

¶35

"9. The cardinal principle for exercise of power under section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure is that the ends of justice should demand the transfer of the suit, appeal or other proceeding. In matrimonial matters, wherever Courts are called upon to consider the plea of transfer, the Courts have to take into consideration the economic soundness of both the parties, the social strata of the spouses and their behavioural pattern, their standard of life prior to the marriage and subsequent thereto and the circumstances of both the parties in eking out their livelihood and under whose protective umbrella they are seeking their sustenance to life. Given the prevailing socio- economic paradigm in the Indian society, generally, it is the wife's convenience which must be looked at while considering transfer. (emphasis supplied) 10.Further, when two or more proceedings are pending in different Courts between the same parties which raise common question of fact and law, and when the decisions in the cases are interdependent, it is desirable that they should be tried together by the same Judge so as to avoid multiplicity in trial of the same issues and conflict of decisions”.

¶36

Page 4 of 7

¶37

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

¶38

Tr.C.M.P.No.162 of 2023 and C.M.P.No.3571 of 2023

¶39

It is also relevant to refer the decision made by the Madurai

¶40

Bench of Madras High Court in TR.CMP(MD)No.108 of 2010 dated

¶41

03.03.2011, wherein, it has observed as below:-

¶42

''18.It is true that section 19 of the Hindu Marriage Act, has been amended by insertion of proviso of (iii)(a) to section 19. Of Course, this amended section 19(iii)(a) gives special preference to the wife to file a petition or defending the case of the husband before the Court within whose jurisdiction she resides. The intention of the legislator is to safe-guard the interest and rights of the women, who are being subjected to harassment and cruelty. But this special preference conferred under section 19 (iii)(a) of the Hindu Marriage Act shall not be used to wreck vengeance on the husband. There must be a justifiable cause to select the jurisdiction of the Court where she resides.''

¶43

In the light of the proposition laid down in the judgment of

¶44

the Hon'ble Supreme Court in N.C.V.Aishwarya case cited supra and also in the light of the observation made by this Court, wherein, it has been held that convenience of the wife has to be considered, while transferring the case from one Court to another, there can be no impediment for allowing this petition as prayed for.

¶45

Page 5 of 7

¶46

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

¶47

Tr.C.M.P.No.162 of 2023 and C.M.P.No.3571 of 2023

¶48

Accordingly, this Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is allowed. The case in O.S. No.98 of 2022 is hereby withdrawn from the file of the Additional District Munsif Court, Aruppukottai, Virudhunagar District, and transferred to the file of the District Munsif Court, Perundurai, Erode District. No costs. Consequently, connected Civil Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶49

09.10.2025

¶50

mtl Index : Yes/No Speaking order : Yes/No Neutral Case Citation : Yes/No

¶51

¶52