Section 19[iii-a] of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 is intended to protect the interest of the wife in the selection of jurisdiction for matrimonial proceedings and should be interpreted in a way beneficial to the wife.

The wife is the petitioner and the husband is the respondent in the transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition. The husband filed O.P.No.4195 of 2015 on the file of the Family Court, Chennai which is now pending on the file of the Principal Judge, Family Court, Chennai, under Section 13[1][i-a] of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for a decree of divorce dissolving the marriage between them. The wife has now come forward with the present petition for transferring the said O.P. to the file of the Sub Court, Nagercoil within whose jurisdiction she resides. The respondent has filed a counter which contains averments pertaining to the merits of the O.P.

2. The arguments advanced by Mr.J.Kamaraj, learned counsel for the petitioner and by Mr.G.Padmanabhan, learned counsel for the respondent are heard. Materials available are also perused.

3. Admittedly, the parties are Hindus and their marriage was solemnised in accordance with the provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. The O.P. for dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce also came to be filed under Section 13[1][i-a] of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. Section 19[iii-a] of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 has been included in the statute to protect the interest of the wife so far as the selection of jurisdiction is concerned. Though the husband's petition can be filed in the Courts having jurisdiction over the place of marriage, place wherein the respondent/wife resides or where both the husband and wife last resided together, sub clause [iii-a] enables the wife to file the petition in the Court having jurisdiction over the place in which she resides. Such a concession is not available to the husband, namely, to file a suit [OP] in a Court having jurisdiction over the place in which he resides.

4. The said provision has to be interpreted in a way beneficial to the wife. The legislature clearly intended to benefit the wife and such a benefit conferred on the wife cannot be lightly denied, unless there shall be lack of bonafide in seeking transfer of the case. In fact, the Supreme Court way back in 2001 held that matrimonial proceedings filed by the husband can be sought to be transferred to the court having jurisdiction over the place wherein the wife is living on the ground of convenience.

5. In Sumita Singh vs. Kumar Sanjay and Another reported in AIR 2002 SC 396, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that a wife living at Delhi could seek the transfer of the matrimonial proceedings initiated by her husband in Ara, which is about 1100 Kms from Delhi to a court in Delhi on the ground of inability to travel the said distance as she was residing with her parents at Gurgaon.

6. Similar is the view expressed by the Supreme Court in Vinitha Jitesh Tolani @ Manmeet Laghmani vs. Jitesh Kishore Tolani reported in 2010 (6) Bom. C.R.145, where the Supreme Court transferred husband's petition from the Court of Civil Judge at Goa to the Family Court at Delhi and dismissed the petition filed by the husband seeking the transfer of the wife's petition filed against the husband.

7. A Division Bench of this court in R.Sridharan vs. Presiding Officer, Principal Family Court, Chennai and R.Sukanya reported in (2010) 4 CTC 822 interpreting Section 19(iii-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 to be a benevolent provision intending to confer benefit on the wife in respect of the choice of jurisdiction, chose to make an observation that such a provision meant for the benefit of women of our country should be given a meaningful interpretation by the court. The relevant paragraph is extracted hereunder:

"22. While considering a provision like section 19 (iii-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, the objects and reasons which prompted the parliament to incorporate such a provision has also to be taken note of. Sub clause (iii-a) was inserted in Section 19 with a specific purpose. Experience is the best teacher. The Government found the difficulties faced by women in the matter of initiation os materimonial proceedings. The report s