Dismissed¶26

V.Rajalakshmi v. a.Dinakaran

Madras HC15 Jul 2026TR CMP/275/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras High Court; Tr.CMP.No.275 of 2025; CMP. No.5317 of 2025; Section 24 CPC transfer petition; transfer of matrimonial case H.M.O.P. No.329 of 2019 from Subordinate Court Kancheepuram to Family Court Tiruvannamalai; transfer refused at belated stage; husband's evidence concluded; petitioner already cross-examined respondent's witnesses; demeanor of witnesses; directions to conclude trial by 31.10.2026 and dispose of HMOP by 30.11.2026; cross-examination without adjournment; P.B. Balaji; 15-07-2026; V.Rajalakshmi v. A.Dinakaran; dismissed; no costs.

What did the court decide?

No relief; the transfer petition was declined. The Tr.CMP was dismissed with the trial-court directions noted above, the connected miscellaneous petition was also dismissed, and no costs were awarded. ¶26

V.Rajalakshmi Vs a.Dinakaran — Madras HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶26

Issue for consideration

Whether the petition in H.M.O.P. No.329 of 2019, pending before the Subordinate Court, Kancheepuram, should be withdrawn from that court and transferred to the file of the Family Court, Tiruvannamalai.

¶11

Court's answer

Finding force in the respondent's submissions, the court held that with the entire evidence on the respondent/husband's side concluded and the demeanor of witnesses already observed by the trial court, it would not be proper or judicious to transfer the proceedings at that stage merely to enable the remaining chief/cross-examination and further witnesses.

¶22

Ratio / Principle

Direction: the petitioner shall appear on 30.07.2026 and record her chief examination, either by way of proof affidavit or in person/orally; for cross-examination, the Sub Court, Kancheepuram shall fix a convenient date, ascertaining the convenience of the petitioner/wife and respondent's counsel, and the cross-examination shall be concluded on that date without any adjournment.

¶23

Key takeaways

Direction: further witnesses, if any, are to be examined on dates fixed ascertaining their convenience; the trial shall be concluded on or before 31.10.2026 and the H.M.O.P. shall be disposed of by 30.11.2026.ratio¶23

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court (P.B. Balaji, J.; 15-07-2026) dismisses Tr.CMP.No.275 of 2025 filed under Section 24 CPC by V.Rajalakshmi seeking transfer of H.M.O.P. No.329 of 2019 from the Subordinate Court, Kancheepuram to the Family Court, Tiruvannamalai. With the entire evidence on the respondent-husband's side concluded, the trial court having had the benefit of the demeanor of witnesses, and the petitioner having participated in the trial and fully cross-examined the respondent's witnesses roughly eight years after the H.M.O.P. was filed, the court held that transfer at that belated stage would not be proper or judicious. Instead, it directed the petitioner to appear on 30.07.2026 to record her chief examination (proof affidavit or orally), directed the Sub Court, Kancheepuram to fix a convenient date for her cross-examination to be concluded without adjournment (and similarly accommodate further witnesses), and fixed timelines: trial to conclude on or before 31.10.2026 and the H.M.O.P. to be disposed of by 30.11.2026. Connected miscellaneous petition dismissed; no costs.

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 15-07-2026

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.B. BALAJI

¶5

Tr.CMP.No.275 of 2025 and CMP. No.5317 of 2025

V.Rajalakshmi

..Petitioner(s)

A.Dinakaran

..Respondent(s)

Prayer: Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition filed under Section 24 of CPC, to order for the withdrawal of the petition in H.M.O.P. No.329 of 2019, pending on the file of the Subordinate Court, Kancheepuram and to transfer the same to the file of the Family Court, Tiruvannamalai.

¶12

For Petitioner(s): Mr.V.Prakash Babu For Respondent(s): Mr.V.Vargees Amal Raja

¶13

ORDER

¶14

The learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner apart from examining herself, intends to examine two other independent witnesses, who are also residents of Thiruvannamalai and he would therefore, reiterate his request

¶15

for allowing the Transfer Miscellaneous Petition.

¶16

The learned counsel for the respondent would however states that the

¶17

Tr.CMP itself was filed belatedly, after waiting for eight years after filing of the

¶18

Page1 of 4

¶19

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

¶20

H.M.O.P. No.329 of 2019 and after participating in the trial and also fully cross examining the respondent's witnesses, it is not open to the petitioner to seek transfer at this belated stage.

¶21

I find force in the submissions of the learned counsel for the

¶22

respondent. Admittedly, the entire evidence on the side of the respondent/husband has been concluded and the Court has also had the benefit of demeanor of witnesses and at this stage, it would not be proper or judicious to transfer the proceedings for enabling the respondent to appear for his chief and cross examination alone and thereafter, examining further witnesses.

¶23

In the light of the above, considering the fact that the OP is now listed for chief examination of the petitioner on 30.07.2026, it is made clear that the petitioner shall appear on 30.07.2026 and record her chief examination, either by way of proof affidavit or in person/orally. For cross examination, after ascertaining the convenience of the petitioner/wife and the learned counsel for the respondent, the Sub Court, Kancheepuram shall fix a convenient date, on which date, without taking any adjournment, the cross examination of the petitioner shall be concluded. If further witnesses are proposed to be examined, the Court shall similarly ascertain the convenience of the witnesses and fix dates accordingly. The Trial shall be concluded on or before, 31.10.2026 and the HMOP shall be disposed of by, 30.11.2026.

¶24

Page2 of 4

¶25

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

¶26