Madras High Court
Bhakiya Lakshmi vs Kiresh Ganesh on 9 October, 2025
Tr.C.M.P.No.523 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 09.10.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN
TR CMP No.523 of 2025
and
C.M.P.No.12995 of 2025
Bhakiya Lakshmi ...Petitioner
vs
Kiresh Ganesh ...Respondent
Prayer:Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition filed under Section 24 of
C.P.C. to withdraw H.M.O.P.No.460 of 2025 pending on the file of the
Family Court, Madurai and transfer the same to the Family Court,
Coimbatore.
For Petitioner(s): Mr.D.Ashokkumar
For Respondent(s):No Appearance
ORDER
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 13/10/2025 04:17:57 pm )
This petition has been filed to withdraw H.M.O.P.No.460 of 2025
on the file of the Family Court, Madurai, and transfer the same to the
file of the Family Court, Coimbatore.
2. Heard Mr.D.Ashokkumar learned counsel for the petitioner.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would
submit that the respondent has not chosen to enter appearance before
this Court despite service of notice.
4. It is seen that service of notice has been completed on the
respondent and the name of the respondent is also printed in the cause
list today. The respondent was called absent and set ex parte.
5. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would
submit that the marriage between the petitioner and the respondent was
solemnized on 27.08.2017 in the presence of the elders of both families
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 13/10/2025 04:17:57 pm )
and they were blessed with two female child, namely Prathiksha and
Samiksha. The petitioner and the respondent has been living separately
since the year 2021. The respondent/husband filed a petition for
restitution of conjugal rights in H.M.O.P.No.460 of 2025 before the
Family Court, Madurai under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act.
The petitioner /wife is working as a Junior Assistant at Coimbatore
Corporation and both children are under her care and custody. In such
a situation, it is not possible to go to Madurai to attend the hearings as
it is far away from Coimbatore and there is no one to support her in
taking care of the children. Therefore, it is just and necessary to
transfer the said case from the Family Court, Madurai, to the Family
Court, Coimbatore.
6. I have gone through the affidavit filed in support this
petition and I find merit in the submissions made by the learned
counsel for the petitioner.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 13/10/2025 04:17:57 pm )
7. At this juncture, it may be apposite to cite the judgment of
the Hon'ble Apex Court in N.C.V.Aishwarya vs. A.S.Saravana Karthik
(MANU/SC/1211/2022 : 2022 Live Law (SC) 627) held at paras 9 and
10, which reads as under:-
"9. 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 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 socio-economic paradigm
in the Indian society, generally, it is the wife's
convenience which must be looked at while
considering transfer. (emphasis
supplied)
10.Further, when two or more proceedings are
pending in different Courts between the same parties
which raise common question of fact and law, and
when the decisions in the cases are interdependent, it
is desirable that they should be tried together by the
same Judge so as to avoid multiplicity in trial of the
same issues and conflict of decisions”.
8. It is also relevant to refer the decision made by the Madurai
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 13/10/2025 04:17:57 pm )
Bench of Madras High Court in TR.CMP(MD)No.108 of 2010 dated
03.03.2011, wherein, it 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 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.''
9. Considering the proposition laid down in the judgment of
the Hon'ble Supreme Court in N.C.V.Aishwarya case cited supra and
also considering the observation made by this Court, wherein, it has
been held that convenience of the wife has to be considered, while
transferring the case from one Court to another, there can be no
impediment for allowing this petition as prayed for.
10. Accordingly, this transfer civil miscellaneous petition is
allowed. The case in H.M.O.P.No.460 of 2025 is hereby withdrawn
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 13/10/2025 04:17:57 pm )
from the file of the Family Court, Madurai and transferred to the file of
the Family Court, Coimbatore. No costs. Connected C.M.P. is closed.
09.10.2025
srn
Index:Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Internet:Yes;
Neutral Citation:Yes/No
To
1.The Family Court, Madurai
2.The Family Court,
Coimbatore.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 13/10/2025 04:17:57 pm )
M.JOTHIRAMAN J.
srn
09.10.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 13/10/2025 04:17:57 pm )
