Madras High Court
C.N.Balasaraswathy vs K.Saravanan on 3 August, 2022
TR.C.M.P(MD)No.367 of 2021
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 03.08.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI
TR.C.M.P(MD)No.367 of 2021
and
C.M.P(MD)No.7404 of 2021
C.N.Balasaraswathy ... Petitioner
Vs
K.Saravanan ... Respondent
Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed
under Section 24 of C.P.C, to withdraw the case in
O.P.No.1332 of 2021 on the file of the VI Additional
Principal Judge, Family Court at Chennai and the same
is transfer to the Sub Court at Aruppukottai,
Virudhunagar District.
For Petitioner : Mr.R.Murugappan
For Respondent : Mr.C.Mayilvahana Rajendran
ORDER
This Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition has
been filed seeking transfer of the case in O.P.No.1332
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
TR.C.M.P(MD)No.367 of 2021
of 2021 from the file of the VI Additional Principal
Judge, Family Court at Chennai to the Sub Court at
Aruppukottai, Virudhunagar District.
2.The marriage between the petitioner and
the respondent was solemnized on 23.05.2013.
Due to difference of opinion, they are living
separately. However, the respondent has filed the above
petition for restitution of conjugal rights. At the
time of filing of the above petition, she was residing
in Chennai and now she is residing in her parents's
house in Virudhunagar District and she is having two
children of tender age. Therefore, this petition has
been filed seeking transfer of the proceedings from
Chennai to Aruppukottai.
3.The learned Counsel for the respondent objects
for transferring the case as prayed for and submits
that the petitioner's father is working as a Sub
Inspector of Police in Aruppukottai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
TR.C.M.P(MD)No.367 of 2021
4.In reply to the above, the learned Counsel for
the petitioner the apprehension of the respondent is
unwarranted and even before three years the
petitioner's father passed away.
5.The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of
Amitha Shah vs- Virendar Lal Shah, reported
(2003)10 SCC 609 has held that the convenience of the
wife and more so of the child must be taken into
account while deciding the petition for transfer and in
the case of Rajani Kishor Paradeshi Vs Kishor Babulal
Paradeshi reported in (2005) 12 SCC 237, the Hon'ble
Apex Court has held that in such type of transfer
petitions, the convenience of the wife is to be
preferred over the convenience of the husband.
6.This Court being satisfied with the reasons
stated in the affidavit filed in support of this
petition and also taking into consideration that the
convenience of wife is to be taken into consideration
at the time of considering transfer petitions as held
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
TR.C.M.P(MD)No.367 of 2021
by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the judgments cited
supra, is inclined to allow the present petition.
7.In the light of the above, this transfer civil
miscellaneous petition stands allowed with the
following directions:
(i)The proceedings in O.P.No.1332 of 2021
is withdrawn from VI Additional Principal
Judge, Family Court, Chennai and transferred to
the Sub Court, Aruppukottai.
(ii)The learned VI Additional Principal
Judge, Family Court, Chennai shall send the
above case records within a period of fifteen
days from the date of receipt of a copy of this
order to the learned Sub Judge, Aruppukottai
who in turn, on receipt of the case, shall
dispose of the same as expeditiously as
possible. No costs. Consequently, connected
miscellaneous petition stands closed.
03.08.2022
Index: Yes/No
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
TR.C.M.P(MD)No.367 of 2021
To
1. The VI Additional Principal Judge
Family Court,
Chennai.
2. The Sub Judge,
Aruppukotta.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
TR.C.M.P(MD)No.367 of 2021
B.PUGALENDHI, J.
dsk
TR.C.M.P(MD)No.367 of 2021
03.08.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
