Allowed¶37

S.Divya v. G.N.Praveen

Madras HC24 Sept 2025TR CMP/593/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Transfer of custody/guardianship proceedings under Section 24 CPC; wife's convenience test for matrimonial transfer petitions; N.C.V.Aishwarya vs. A.S.Saravana Karthik MANU/SC/1211/2022 relied upon; Madras HC Madurai Bench TR.CMP(MD)No.108 of 2010 (03.03.2011) relied upon; Section 19 Hindu Marriage Act proviso (iii)(a) discussed in quoted passage; G.W.O.P.No.118 of 2022 transferred from Additional Family Court, Coimbatore to Principal Family Court, Chennai; petitioner S.Divya; respondent G.N.Praveen; connected C.M.P.No.14518 of 2025 closed; decided 24.09.2025.

What did the court decide?

Withdrawal of G.W.O.P.No.118 of 2022 from the Additional Family Court, Coimbatore and its transfer to the Principal Family Court, Chennai for expeditious disposal; no costs; connected C.M.P.No.14518 of 2025 closed. ¶37

S.Divya Vs G.N.Praveen — Matrimonial and Divorce | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶37

Issue for consideration

Whether the Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition under Section 24 of CPC should be allowed so as to withdraw and transfer the custody proceedings G.W.O.P.No.118 of 2022 from the Additional Family Court, Coimbatore to a Chennai court, having regard to the convenience of the petitioner/wife.

¶14

Court's answer

In the light of the Supreme Court's ruling in N.C.V.Aishwarya (that generally the wife's convenience must be looked at while considering transfer of matrimonial proceedings) and this Court's observation that the convenience of the wife has to be considered when transferring a case from one Court to another, there is no impediment to allowing the transfer petition as prayed for.

¶36

Ratio / Principle

Operative direction: G.W.O.P.No.118 of 2022 is withdrawn from the file of the Additional Family Court, Coimbatore and transferred to the file of the Principal Family Court, Chennai, which shall dispose of the case as expeditiously as possible; no costs awarded and the connected Civil Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶37

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court (M. Jothiraman, J.) — Tr.CMP.No.593 of 2025 & C.M.P.No.14518 of 2025, decided 24.09.2025. Transfer under Section 24 CPC of child-custody proceedings: the petitioner/wife, working in Chennai, sought withdrawal and transfer of her husband's G.W.O.P.No.118 of 2022 (custody petition) from the Additional Family Court, Coimbatore, being unable to travel to Coimbatore for every hearing. Relying on the Supreme Court's decision in N.C.V.Aishwarya v. A.S.Saravana Karthik (paras 9-10: in matrimonial matters the wife's convenience must ordinarily govern transfer) together with the Madras High Court (Madurai Bench) decision in TR.CMP(MD)No.108 of 2010 dated 03.03.2011, the Court held there was no impediment to allowing the petition and ordered the case withdrawn from Coimbatore and transferred to the Principal Family Court, Chennai, to be disposed of expeditiously. No costs; the connected petition was closed. (Note: the prayer had mentioned the Sub Court, Tambaram as transferee forum, but the order as passed directs transfer to the Principal Family Court, Chennai.)

¶1

Tr.CMP.No.593 of 2025

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 24.09.2025

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN

¶6

Tr.CMP.No.593 of 2025

¶7

& C.M.P.No.14518 of 2025

¶8

S.Divya ... Petitioner

¶9

Versus

¶10

G.N.Praveen ... Respondent

¶11

Prayer: Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition filed under Section 24 of CPC, to withdraw and transfer G.W.O.P.No.118 of 2022, pending on the file of the Additional Family Court, Coimbatore and transfer the same to the Sub Court, Tambaram.

¶12

O R D E R

¶13

The petitioner / wife has come up with the above transfer petition

¶14

seeking transfer of G.W.O.P.No.118 of 2022 from the file of the Additional

¶15

Family Court, Coimbatore, to the file of the Sub Court, Tambaram.

¶16

1/6

¶17

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

¶18

Tr.CMP.No.593 of 2025

¶19

Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the respondent.

¶20

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the respondent/husband has filed G.W.O.P.No.118 of 2022 before the Additional Family Court, Coimbatore, seeking custody of the child. The petitioner is working in Chennai and she is unable to travel to Coimbatore along with the child for each and every hearing to attend the case. Hence, the present petition is filed seeking transfer. He would further submit that the case may be transferred to the Principal Family Court, Chennai.

¶21

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/wife.

¶22

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

¶23

2/6

¶24

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

¶25

Tr.CMP.No.593 of 2025

¶26

"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)

¶27

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”.

¶28

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

¶29

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

¶30

03.03.2011, wherein, it has observed as below:-

¶31

''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.''

¶32

3/6

¶33

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

¶34

Tr.CMP.No.593 of 2025

¶35

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

¶36

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.

¶37

Accordingly, this Transfer Civil Miscellaneous petition is allowed. The case in G.W.O.P.No.118 of 2022 is hereby withdrawn from the file of the Additional Family Court, Coimbatore and transferred to the file of the Principal Family Court, Chennai and the Principal Family Court, Chennai, dispose of G.W.O.P.No.118 of 2022 as expeditiously as possible. No costs. Connected Civil Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶38

24.09.2025

¶39

ssb

¶40

Index: Yes / No Speaking Order : Yes / No NCC : Yes / No

¶41

4/6

¶42

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

¶43

Tr.CMP.No.593 of 2025