Madras High Court
Sri Janani vs S.Karthi on 9 October, 2025
Tr.C.M.P.No.3 of 2025
and C.M.P.No.184 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 09.10.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN
Tr.CMP.No.3 of 2025
and
C.M.P.No.184 of 2025
Sri Janani ... Petitioner
Vs
S.Karthi ... Respondent
Prayer:- Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition filed under Section 24 of
the CPC, to withdraw HMOP No.730 of 2023 pending before the Family
Court, Salem and transfer the same to the file of the Subordinate Court,
Attur,
For Petitioner : Mr.A.Sriram
For Respondent : No appearance
ORDER
This petition has been filed to withdraw HMOP No.730 of
2023 from the file of the Family Court, Salem, and to transfer the same to
the file of the Subordinate Court, Attur.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 14/10/2025 03:06:55 pm )
2. Heard the learned counsel appearing 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 petitioner got married to the respondent on 14.03.2022 at
Arulmigu Sri Thanthonreeswarar Temple Belur, Salem, as per Hindu
Rites and Customs. Out of the wedlock, they blessed with a female baby.
She is presently aged 1½ years old. The petitioner / wife has filed a
petition in M.C.No.54 of 2024 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate Court
No.I, Attur, seeking for maintenance for the petitioner and her daughter.
The respondent / husband filed H.M.O.P.No.730 of 2023 before the
Family Court, Salem, seeking for restitution of conjugal rights making
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 14/10/2025 03:06:55 pm )
allegations and averments against the petitioner. The learned counsel for
the petitioner further would submit that the petitioner could not able to
travel from Attur to Salem along with her parents with female child for
every hearing of the case. Therefore, the case in H.M.O.P.No.120 of 2024
may be withdrawn from the file of the Principal Subordinate Court,
Dindigul and transferred to the file of Subordinate Court, Tiruvallur.
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.
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
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 14/10/2025 03:06:55 pm )
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
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. In the light of the proposition laid down in the judgment of
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 14/10/2025 03:06:55 pm )
the Hon'ble Supreme Court in N.C.V.Aishwarya case cited supra and also
in the light of 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.730 of 2023 is hereby withdrawn from
the file of the Family Court, Salem, and transferred to the file of the
Subordinate Court, Attur. No costs. Consequently, connected Civil
Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
09.10.2025
mtl
Index : Yes/No
Speaking order : Yes/No
Neutral Case Citation : Yes/No
M. JOTHIRAMAN, J.
mtl
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 14/10/2025 03:06:55 pm )
To
1. The Family Court, Salem.
2. The Subordinate Court, Attur.
09.10.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 14/10/2025 03:06:55 pm )
