Allowed¶40

Viveka, v. Lakshmi Narayanan

Madras HC8 Jun 2026TR CMP(MD)/190/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madurai Bench of Madras High Court (Justice K. Murali Shankar), 08.06.2026: wife's transfer petition under Section 24 CPC allowed moving H.M.O.P.No.350 of 2025 (restitution of conjugal rights) from Principal Subordinate Court, Tenkasi to Family Court, Thoothukudi on account of petitioner's residence; wife's convenience principle relied upon from 2022 Live Law (SC) 627 (N.C.V. Aishwarya Vs. A.S. Saravana Karthik Sha); records transmission within 10 days; connected miscellaneous petition closed, no costs.

What did the court decide?

Transfer petition allowed: H.M.O.P.No.350 of 2025 withdrawn from the Principal Subordinate Court, Tenkasi and transferred to the Family Court, Thoothukudi; records to be transmitted within 10 days; connected C.M.P.(MD)No.4390 of 2026 closed; no costs. ¶40

Viveka, Vs Lakshmi Narayanan — Madras HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶40

Issue for consideration

Whether H.M.O.P.No.350 of 2025 should be withdrawn from the Principal Subordinate Court, Tenkasi and transferred to the Family Court, Thoothukudi, having regard to the petitioner's residence at Thoothukudi. +1 more

¶12

Court's answer

Taking note that the petitioner resides at Thoothukudi, and applying the principle (per the cited Supreme Court passage) that generally the wife's convenience is looked at in transfer petitions under Section 24 CPC, the Court ordered H.M.O.P.No.350 of 2025 to be withdrawn from the Principal Subordinate Court, Tenkasi and transferred to the Family Court, Thoothukudi.

¶35

Ratio / Principle

The learned Principal Subordinate Judge, Tenkasi was directed to transmit the entire records in H.M.O.P.No.350 of 2025 to the Family Court, Thoothukudi within a period of 10 days from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.

¶35

Key takeaways

On receiving the case bundle, the learned Judge, Family Court, Thoothukudi was directed to take up the petition on file and proceed in accordance with law.ratio¶35

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Transfer petition under Section 24 CPC by the wife allowed. H.M.O.P.No.350 of 2025 (restitution of conjugal rights), pending before the Principal Subordinate Court, Tenkasi, was withdrawn and transferred to the Family Court, Thoothukudi, the petitioner residing at Thoothukudi; the Court relied on N.C.V. Aishwarya Vs. A.S. Saravana Karthik Sha, 2022 Live Law (SC) 627, for the principle that generally the wife's convenience governs transfers in matrimonial matters. The respondent's allegation of life threats from the petitioner's uncle was noted but no police complaint had been preferred. The Principal Subordinate Judge, Tenkasi was directed to transmit the records within 10 days; the Family Court, Thoothukudi to proceed in accordance with law. Connected C.M.P.(MD)No.4390 of 2026 closed; no costs.

¶1

Tr.C.M.P.(MD)No.190 of 2026

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 08.06.2026

¶4

CORAM:

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.MURALI SHANKAR

¶6

Tr.C.M.P.(MD)No.190 of 2026 and C.M.P.(MD)No.4390 of 2026

¶7

Viveka

¶8

... Petitioner/ Respondent

¶9

Vs.

¶10

Lakshmi Narayanan

¶11

... Respondent/ Petitioner

¶12

Prayer : This Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition filed under Section 24 C.P.C., to withdraw H.M.O.P.No.350 of 2025 pending before the learned Principal Sub Court, Tenkasi, Tenkasi District and transfer the same to Family Court, Thoothukudi.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Muthu Malai Raja

¶14

For Respondent : Mr.P.P.Alwin Balan

¶15

1/6

¶16

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

¶17

Tr.C.M.P.(MD)No.190 of 2026

¶18

ORDER

¶19

The Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed to withdraw the case in H.M.O.P.No.350 of 2025 from the file of the Principal Subordinate Court, Tenkasi, and transfer the same to the file of the Family Court, Thoothukudi.

¶20

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

¶21

It is not in dispute that the marriage between the petitioner and the respondent was solemnized on 06.06.2025 as per the Hindu rites and customs and that subsequently there arose some misunderstanding and they are living separately. It is also not in dispute that the respondent filed a petition in H.M.O.P.No.350 of 2025 seeking restitution of conjugal rights and the same is pending on the file of the Principal Subordinate Court, Tenkasi.

¶22

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is residing at Thoothukudi and finds it difficult to travel

¶23

2/6

¶24

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

¶25

Tr.C.M.P.(MD)No.190 of 2026

¶26

to Tenkasi to attend the hearings.

¶27

The learned counsel appearing for the respondent would submit that the respondent is facing life threats from the petitioner's uncle and the respondent, in the petition for restitution of conjugal rights itself, has narrated about the alleged threats. But even according to the learned counsel appearing for the respondent, the respondent has not preferred any police complaint nor taken any action against the petitioner's uncle for the alleged threats.

¶28

In the case of N.C.V.Aishwarya Vs. A.S.Saravana Karthik Sha reported in 2022 Live Law (SC) 627 , the Hon'ble Supreme Court has reiterated the position with generally, it is the wife's convenience, which must be looked at while considering the transfer petition under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure and the relevant passage is extracted hereunder :

¶29

“ 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

¶30

3/6

¶31

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

¶32

Tr.C.M.P.(MD)No.190 of 2026

¶33

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 socioeconomic paradigm in the Indian society, generally, it is the wife's convenience which must be looked at while considering transfer.", the bench observed. ”

¶34

Considering the above facts and circumstances and also taking

¶35

note of the fact that the petitioner is residing at Thoothukudi, this Court is of the view that the case in H.M.O.P.No.350 of 2025 is ordered to be withdrawn from the file of the Principal Subordinate Court, Tenkasi, and transfer the same to the file of the Family Court, Thoothukudi. Accordingly, the learned Principal Subordinate Judge, Tenkasi, is hereby directed to transmit the entire records in H.M.O.P.No.350 of 2025 to the file of the Family Court, Thoothukudi, within a period of 10 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and on receiving the case bundle, the learned Judge, Family Court, Thoothukudi, is directed to take up the

¶36

4/6

¶37

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

¶38

Tr.C.M.P.(MD)No.190 of 2026

¶39

petition on file and proceed in accordance with law.

¶40