ORDER :

The Transfer Petition was listed for final hearing on 08.12.2022, none appeared for the petitioner and thus, the case was listed under the caption “For Dismissal” on 12.12.2022. Again, when the matter was called on 20.12.2022, there was also no representation on behalf of the petitioner. In order to give one more opportunity, this Court passed an order, directing the Registry to list this matter once again under the caption “For Dismissal” on 22.12.2022. Even Today also i.e. on 10.01.2023, when the matter is taken up for hearing, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. Thus, this Court is inclined to pass final orders.

2. The petition for transfer is filed to withdraw and transfer the petition in F.C.M.C.No.9 of 2022 from the file of the District Family Court, Chengelpattu to the file of Principal District Family Court, Chennai.

3. The marriage between the petitioner and the respondent was solemnised on 03.09.1998 as per Hindu Rites and Customs. On account of misunderstanding, the husband and wife are living separately. The respondent filed maintenance in F.C.M.C.No.9 of 2022 on the file of the Family Court, Chengalpet seeking maintenance for the wife and daughter. The petitioner filed present transfer petitioner to transfer the maintenance petition from Chengalpet to Chennai.

4. The place of the respondent are considered for the purpose of adjudication of the maintenance case. The Court concerned has to consider the grant of interim maintenance in such circumstances taking note of the mitigating factors. If the 1st respondent wife is unemployed and the 2nd respondent daughter is being maintained by without any source of income, then the livelihood of the 2nd respondent is also to be protected by the Trial Courts.

5. In such circumstances, Courts are bound to grant interim maintenance to protect the livelihood of the minor children. In the present case, the respondent had already filed a maintenance case, before the Family Court at Chengalpet, which is pending. The reasons stated in the present transfer case are neither candid nor convincing.

6. The principles regarding transfer petitions, more specifically in the matters of matrimonial cases, are well settled through the three decisions of the High Court of Madras, in the following cases:-

(i) The Hon'ble Division Bench of the High Court of Madras in W.A.No.1181 of 2009, dated 09.07.2010, wherein in paragraphs-21 and 22, it has been observed as under:-

“21. The domicile or citizenship of the opposite party is immaterial in a case like this. In case the marriage was solemnized under Hindu Law marital relationship is governed by the provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act. Therefore, Section 19 has to be given a purposeful interpretation. It is the residence of the wife, which determines the question of jurisdiction, in case the proceeding was initiated at the instance of the wife.

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 of matrimonial proceedings. The report submitted by the Law Commission as well as National Commission for Women, underlying the need for such amendment so as to enable the women to approach the nearest jurisdictional court to redress their matrimonial grievances, were also taken note of by the Government. Therefore such a beneficial provision meant for the women of our Country should be given a meaningful interpretation by Courts.”

(ii) In yet another case in Tr.CMP.Nos.138 and 139 of 2006, dated 30.08.2006, the High Court of Madras has considered the following judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India:-

“(1) In the case of Mona Aresh Goel vs. Aresh Satya Goel [(2000) 9 SCC 255], when the wife pleaded that she