Tr.C.M.P.No.872 of 2022

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 09.12.2022

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM

Tr.C.M.P.No.872 of 2022

and

C.M.P.No.15078 of 2022

S.Uma Maheshwari @ S.R.Aphurvika

..

Petitioner

vs

A.Senthil Kumar

..

Respondent

Prayer: Transfer CMP is filed under Section 24 of the Civil Procedure Code,

to order withdrawal of the case in H.M.O.P.No.4646 of 2021 on the file of

the learned VII Additional Family Court, Chennai and transfer the same on

the file of the Family Court Salem.

For Petitioner

:

Ms.V.Ambika

For Respondent

:

No Appearance

Page 1 of 8

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Tr.C.M.P.No.872 of 2022

ORDER

The prayer sought for in this transfer petition is to order withdrawal

of the case in H.M.O.P.No.4646 of 2021 on the file of the learned VII

Additional Family Court, Chennai and transfer the same on the file of the

learned Family Court, Salem.

2. The marriage between the petitioner and the respondent was

solemnized on 23.05.2010 as per the Hindu Rites and Customs. A female

child was born from and out of the wedlock between the petitioner and the

respondent and now living with the petitioner.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner is not

gainfully employed now and is depending on her parents. She is residing

along with her parents at Salem. The respondent filed H.M.O.P.No.4646 of

2021 for restitution of conjugal rights on the file of the learned VII

Additional Family Court, Chennai. The petitioner is not in a position to

travel all along from Salem to Chennai and contest the case filed by the

respondent.

Page 2 of 8

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Tr.C.M.P.No.872 of 2022

4. 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

Page 3 of 8

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Tr.C.M.P.No.872 of 2022

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 was unable to bear the

traveling expenses and even to travel alone and stay

at Bombay, the Supreme Court ordered transfer of

proceedings.

(2) In the case of Geeta