A. Janani Vs K Manikandan

Prayer in TR CMP No. 924 of 2025:Petition filed under section 24 of CPC to withdraw the HMOP No.2552 of 2025 on the file of the IV Additional Family Court, Chennai and transfer it to the sub court Ranipet, Ranipet District.

¶13

Prayer in CMP No. 20976 of 2025: Petition to stay all further proceedings in HMOP No.2552 of 2025 on the file of the IV Additional Family Court, Chennai pending disposal of the above Transfer CMP.

¶14

For Petitioner: Mr.S.Sairaman

¶15

For Respondent: Mr.R.Muthukumar

¶16

__________ Page1 of 5

¶17

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

¶18

TR CMP No. 924 of 2025

¶19

Order

¶20

Heard.

¶21

This Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed to withdraw H.M.O.P. No.2552 of 2025 pending on the file of the IV Additional Family Court, Chennai and to transfer the same to the file of the Sub Court, Ranipet.

¶22

The petitioner is the wife and the respondent is the husband. The marriage between the petitioner and the respondent was solemnized on 27.10.2023 .The respondent/husband has filed H.M.O.P. No.2552 of 2025 on the file of the IV Additional Family Court, Chennai, seeking dissolution of marriage.

¶23

The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is residing at Kaveripakkam, Ranipet District and that she has no independent means; she is depending upon her parents. It is submitted that the distance to Chennai is considerable and it would be difficult for the petitioner to travel for each and every hearing. It is also submitted that there are no children through the wedlock.

¶24

Page2 of 5

¶25

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

¶26

TR CMP No. 924 of 2025

¶27

Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondent would submit that the respondent is residing at Virugambakkam, Chennai, and would further contend that there is life threat to the respondent at the hands of the petitioner’s family members and hence transfer to Ranipet may cause prejudice to the respondent.

¶28

This Court has considered the rival submissions. In matrimonial transfer petitions, the convenience of the wife and the relative hardship in attending the proceedings are relevant considerations, especially when the wife resides away from the place where the proceedings are instituted.

¶29

In the present case, the petitioner is residing at Ranipet District, whereas the proceedings are pending at Chennai. Considering the travel difficulty pleaded by the petitioner and the absence of children, this Court is of the view that the balance of convenience warrants transfer. As regards the apprehension expressed by the respondent, the same can be addressed by seeking appropriate protection accordance with law and that by itself is not a ground to deny transfer, when the overall balance of convenience lies in favour of transfer.

¶30

__________ Page3 of 5

¶31

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

¶32

TR CMP No. 924 of 2025

¶33

Accordingly, the Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition deserves to be allowed. Accordingly, Tr.C.M.P. No.924 of 2025 is allowed. H.M.O.P. No.2552 of 2025 on the file of the IV Additional Family Court, Chennai, is withdrawn and transferred to the file of the Sub Court, Ranipet, Ranipet District. The IV Additional Family Court, Chennai, shall transmit the en-

¶34

tire records to the Sub Court, Ranipet, Ranipet District, within three (3) weeks from the date of receipt of this order and the Sub Court, Ranipet shall dispose of the matter in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, uninfluenced by any observations made in this order. Interim stay granted by this Court on 28.08.2025 shall stand vacated and C.M.P. No.20976 of 2025 is closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶35

06-02-2026

¶36

Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No

¶37

SHL

¶38

To

¶39