Madras High Court
G.Deepa vs K.P.Premkumar on 28 June, 2022
Tr.C.M.P.No.320 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 28.06.2022
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE R.N.MANJULA
Tr.C.M.P.No.320 of 2022
and
C.M.P.Nos.6420 & 6421 of 2022
G.Deepa ... Petitioner
Vs
K.P.Premkumar ... Respondent
Prayer :- Petition is filed under Section 24 of C.P.C., pleased to withdraw the
proceedings in H.M.O.P.No.1235 of 2021 now pending on the file of the Principal
Family Court at Chennai and transfer the same to the file of the Family Court at
Salem.
For Petitioner : Mr.D.Venkateswara Rao
For Respondent : No Appearance
Page 1 / 4
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Tr.C.M.P.No.320 of 2022
ORDER
This Petition has been filed to withdraw H.M.O.P.No.1235 of 2021 pending
on the file of the Principal Family Court, Chennai and transfer it to the Family
Court, Salem.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the materials
available on record. Though the notice was served on the respondent and his name
printed in the cause list, there is no representation on behalf of the respondent.
3. The petitioner is the wife and respondent is the husband. The marriage
between the petitioner and respondent was solemnized on 30.07.2010 as per
Hindu Rites and Customs. Since, the relationship between the couples went bitter,
the Respondent/Husband filed H.M.O.P.No.1235 of 2021, on the file of the
Principal Family Court, Chennai, against the petitioner seeking divorce. Now, the
petitioner herein who is the wife, has preferred the present petition to withdraw
H.M.O.P.No.1235 of 2021 pending on the file of the Principal Family Court,
Chennai and transfer the same to the file of the Family Court, Salem.
Page 2 / 4
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Tr.C.M.P.No.320 of 2022
4. The petitioner has stated that now she is residing with her boy child and
her aged parents and it is very difficult for her to travel from Salem to Chennai, for
attending the Court proceedings at Chennai.
5. It is needless to state that in matrimonial proceedings, preference should
be given to the convenience of the wife. The said position has been settled in
various Judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and more particularly in the
Judgments reported in 2008 (9) SCC 353 [Arti Rani @ Pinki Devi and another
Vs. Dharmendra Kumar Gupta] and AIR 2002 SC 396 [Sumita Singh Vs.
Kumar Sanjay and another]. Infact as per the amended Section 19(iii-a) of the
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, the wife is guarded with the right to file proceedings in
the place where she resides. The above amendment was brought with the object of
facilitating the wife to participate in the matrimonial proceedings without any
hardship. In view of the above reasons, I feel that the prayer of the petitioner
should be considered favourably.
Page 3 / 4
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Tr.C.M.P.No.320 of 2022
R.N.MANJULA, J.
rgi
6. Accordingly, the Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is allowed. The
petition in H.M.O.P.No.1235 of 2021 filed by the Respondent is ordered to be
withdrawn from the file of Principal Family Court, Chennai and transferred to the
file of Family Court, Salem. The learned Judge, Principal Family Court, Chennai is
directed to transmit all the records pertaining to H.M.O.P.No.1235 of 2021 to the
file of the Family Court, Salem, within a period of two weeks from the date of
receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous
Petitions are closed.
28.06.2022
rgi
Index : Yes
Internet : Yes
Speaking Order
To
1.The Judge, Principal Family Court, Chennai.
2.The Judge, Family Court, Salem.
Tr.C.M.P.No.320 of 2022
and
C.M.P.Nos.6420 & 6421 of 2022
Page 4 / 4
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
