Saturday, 02, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

S.Sruthi vs J.Guru
2021 Latest Caselaw 751 Mad

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 751 Mad
Judgement Date : 11 January, 2021

Madras High Court
S.Sruthi vs J.Guru on 11 January, 2021
                                                                             Tr.CMP.No.506 of 2020

                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                     DATED : 11.01.2021

                                                          CORAM

                              THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM

                                                   Tr.C.M.P.No.506 of 2020
                                                            and
                                                   C.M.P.No.12985 of 2019

                     S.Sruthi                                                    .. Petitioner

                                                             vs.

                     J.Guru                                                      .. Respondent

                     PRAYER : Transfer CMP is filed under Section 24 of the Civil Procedure
                     Code, to withdraw and transfer the F.C.O.P.No.113 of 2020 pending on the
                     file of the Family Court, Vellore and transfer the same to the Family Court,
                     Thiruttani.

                                  For Petitioner               : Mr.G.P.Sivakumar

                                  For Respondent              : No-appearance




                     1/8


https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                              Tr.CMP.No.506 of 2020



                                                       ORDER

The petition for transfer is filed to transfer F.C.O.P.No.113 of

2020 from the Family Court, Vellore to the Family Court, Thiruttani.

2. The marriage between the petitioner and the respondent was

solemnized on 08.09.2017 as per the Hindu Rites and Customs. On account

of misunderstanding, the petitioner was forced to leave the matrimonial

home. Now, she is residing in her parents house and out of wedlock, a child

was born. Thus, she is not in a position to attend the case filed by the

respondent in F.CO.P.No.113 of 2020 pending before the Family Court,

Vellore.

3. The principles regarding transfer petitions, more specifically in the

matters of matrimonial cases are well settled through the decisions 3 of the

High Court of Madras, in the following cases:-

(i) The Hon'ble Division Bench of the High Court of Madras in

W.A.No.1181 of 2009, dated 09.07.2010 has held as follows:-

''21. The domicile or citizenship of the

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Tr.CMP.No.506 of 2020

opposite party is immaterial in a case like this. In

case the marriage was solemnized under Hindu

Law marital relationship is governed by the

provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act. Therefore,

Section 19 has to be given a purposeful

interpretation. It is the residence of the wife, which

determines the question of jurisdiction, in case the

proceeding was initiated at the instance of the

wife.

22. While considering a provision like

Section 19 (iii-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, the

objects and reasons which prompted the

parliament to incorporate such a provision has also

to be taken note of. Sub Clause (iii-a) was inserted

in Section 19 with a specific purpose. Experience

is the best teacher. The Government found the

difficulties faced by women in the matter of

initiation of matrimonial proceedings. The report

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Tr.CMP.No.506 of 2020

submitted by the Law Commission as well as

National Commission for Women, underlying the

need for such amendment so as to enable the

women to approach the nearest jurisdictional court

to redress their matrimonial grievances, were also

taken note of by the Government. Therefore such a

beneficial provision meant for the women of our

Country should be given a meaningful

interpretation by Courts.''

(ii) In yet another case in TR.CMP.Nos.138 and 139 of 2006, dated

30.08.2006, the High Court of Madras has considered the following

judgments:-

''16.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.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Tr.CMP.No.506 of 2020

In 2000 (10) SCC 304, the Honourable

Supreme Court has held that where the petitioner's

wife has pleaded lack of money, the same has to be

considered.

In 2000 (9) SCC 355, the wife has filed a

petition to transfer the proceedings initiated by the

husband for divorce, at Bombay. The place of

residence of the wife was at Jaipur, Rajasthan. In

that case, the petitioner is having a small child and

that she pleaded difficulty in going all the way from

Jaipur to Bombay to contest the proceedings from

time to time. Considering the distance and the

difficulties faced by the wife, the Supreme Court has

allowed the transfer petition.

In a decision reported in 2005 (12) SCC

395, the wife has sought for transfer of matrimonial

proceedings and a divorce petition has been filed by

the respondent's husband at Baikunthpur to be

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Tr.CMP.No.506 of 2020

transferred to Allahabad, where the petitioner's wife

was residing, on the ground that it would be difficult

for her to undertake such long distance journey,

particularly in circumstances, in which she finds that

the proceedings under 5 Section 125 Cr.P.C. was

already pending before the Family Court, Allahabad.

Considering the difficulties faced by the wife and

also the long distance journey, the Honourable

Supreme Court was pleased to order transfer of the

proceedings to Allahabad.

(iii) In a decision made in TR.CMP(MD)No.108 of 2010, dated

03.03.2011, the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, has observed as

below:-

''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

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Tr.CMP.No.506 of 2020

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.''

4. In view of the facts and circumstances, the F.C.O.P.No.113 of

2020 pending on the file of the Family Court, Vellore stands transferred to

the Family Court, Thiruttani.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Tr.CMP.No.506 of 2020

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.

ssb

5. Accordingly, this Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition

No.506 of 2020 stands allowed and F.C.O.P.No.113 of 2020 pending on

the file of the Family Court, Vellore is directed to be transferred to the

Family Court, Thiruttani . However, there shall be no order as to costs.

Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

11.01.2021 Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order. Internet : Yes/No.

Index: Yes/No.

ssb

To

1.The Judge, Family Court, Vellore.

2.The Judge, Family Court, Thiruttani.

Tr.CMP.No.506 of 2020

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

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter