Madras High Court
C.N.Balasaraswathy vs K.Saravanan on 3 August, 2022
TR.C.M.P(MD)No.385 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.385 of 2021
and
C.M.P(MD)No.7631 of 2021
1.C.N.Balasaraswathy
2.S.Karthika
3.S.Rajesh Kumar ... Petitioners
[The petitioners 2 and 3 are
represented by their mother
C.N.Balasaraswathi, the first
petitioner herein]
Vs
K.Saravanan ... Respondent
Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed
under Section 24 of C.P.C, to withdraw the case in
M.C.No.240 of 2020 on the file of the Principal Judge,
Family Court at Chennai and the same may be transferred
to the Sub Court at Aruppukottai, Virudhunagar
District.
For Petitioners : Mr.R.Murugappan
For Respondent : Mr.C.Mayilvahana Rajendran
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
TR.C.M.P(MD)No.385 of 2021
ORDER
This Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition has
been filed seeking transfer of the case in
M.C.No.240 of 2020 from the file of the
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. The
petitioners have filed a petition in M.C.No.240 of 2020
before the Principal Judge, Family Court, Chennai. At
the time of filing of the petition, the petitioners
were residing in Chennai and now they are residing in
Virudhunagar District. Therefore, this petition has
been filed seeking transfer of the proceedings from
Chennai to Aruppukottai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
TR.C.M.P(MD)No.385 of 2021
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.
4.In reply to the above, the learned Counsel for
the petitioners submits that 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.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
TR.C.M.P(MD)No.385 of 2021
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
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 M.C.No.240 of 2020 is
withdrawn from Principal Judge, Family Court,
Chennai and transferred to the Sub Court,
Aruppukottai.
(ii)The learned 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.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
TR.C.M.P(MD)No.385 of 2021
No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous
petition stands closed.
03.08.2022
Index: Yes/No
To
1. The VI Additional Principal Judge
Family Court,
Chennai.
2. The Sub Judge,
Aruppukottai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
TR.C.M.P(MD)No.385 of 2021
B.PUGALENDHI, J.
dsk
TR.C.M.P(MD)No.385 of 2021
03.08.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
