Wife sought transfer of husband's matrimonial petition (HMOP) from Sub Court, Tambaram to Family Court, Chennai on grounds of travel hardship. Court relied on Supreme Court transfer principles and allowed the transfer, directing records be sent to Family Court, Chennai.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
TR CMP No. 927 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 01-06-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE R. KALAIMATHI TR CMP No. 927 of 2025 and CMP No.21122 of 2025
O.Janani, W/o. Om Prakash, D/o.M.Bhaskaran, No.110/50, Eden Garden Street, Jamalia, Perambalur, Chennai -600 012.
..Petitioner(s)
Vs. S.Omprakash, S/o.Sivanatham, No.3/333, Jeevanantham Street, Santhoshapuram, Vengaivasal, Selaiyur, Kancheepuram - 600 073.
..Respondent(s)
Prayer: Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed under Section 24 of Civil Procedure Code, 1908, to withdraw H.M.O.P.No.209 of 2025 which is pending before the Sub Court, Tambaram, and to transfer the same to the file of Family Court, Chennai for disposal in accordance with law.
For Petitioner(s) : Mr.M.Kalaiyarasan For Respondent(s): Mr.N.Ganeshmurthy
ORDER
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner (wife) and the learned
counsel for the respondent (husband).
Page1 of 5
TR CMP No. 927 of 2025
2. The petitioner (wife) would aver that she has been residing at Perambur, Chennai, along with her parents and she finds it difficult to travel to Sub Court, Tambaram in order to attend in the Court proceedings. She would further aver that there is no one to accompany her from Perambur to Tambaram, which is more than 50 kms up and down.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would reiterate the grounds set out in the petition and seeks to transfer the aforesaid HMOP from the file of the Sub Court, Tambaram to the Family Court, Chennai.
4. The learned counsel for the respondent per contra would strenuously contend that if the OP instituted by the husband is transferred to the Family Court at Chennai, the respondent would be put into inconvenience and hardship.
“ i. In AIR 2000 SC 3512 (1) (Mona Aresh Goel vs. Aresh Satya Goel), when the wife pleaded that she was unable to bear the traveling expenses and even to travel alone and stay at Bombay, the Supreme Court ordered transfer of proceedings.
ii. In 2000 (10) SCC 304 (Geeta Heera Vs.
Page2 of 5
TR CMP No. 927 of 2025
Harish Chander Heera), the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that where the petitioner's wife has pleaded lack of money, the same has to be considered.
Iii. In Lalita A. Ranga Vs. Ajay Champalal Ranja reported in (2009) 9 SCC 355, wherein the wife, who was having small child and she was finding it difficult to travel from Jaipur to Bombay, and the Hon’ble Apex Court accepting her request ordered the transfer petition in favour of the wife transferring the transfer petition from Family Court at Bandra in Mumbai to the Family Court at Jaipur.”
6. The petitioner (wife) is a resident of Perambur, Chennai. The respondent is a resident of Selaiyur, Kancheepuram. It is stated that she is working at Siruseri. Though her workplace is Siruseri, if the OP is transferred to Chennai, it will be convenient for her to attend the Court proceedings as she is a resident of Perambur.
Page3 of 5
TR CMP No. 927 of 2025
Chennai, on receipt of the records, shall take all effective steps to try and dispose of the matter in accordance with law at the earliest. No Costs.
Consequently, connected Civil Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
01-06-2026
Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No
MAC
To
__________ Page4 of 5
TR CMP No. 927 of 2025
R.KALAIMATHI, J.
MAC
TR CMP No. 927 of 2025 and CMP No.21122 of 2025
01-06-2026
__________ Page5 of 5
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the wife's difficulty travelling over 50 kms from Perambur to Sub Court, Tambaram justified transfer of H.MOP.No.209 of 2025 to Family Court, Chennai?
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Mona Aresh Goel vs. Aresh Satya GoelRelied on¶5
AIR 2000 SC 3512 · Who else cites this
Geeta Heera Vs. Harish Chander HeeraRelied on¶5
2000 (10) SCC 304 · Who else cites this
Lalita A. Ranga Vs. Ajay Champalal RangaRelied on¶5
(2009) 9 SCC 355 · Who else cites this
1 provisions across 1 enactments
O.Janani
S.Omprakash
R. Kalaimathi
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
R. Kalaimathi
Parties & counsel
