Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 43910
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
R. Kalaimathi, J
Kiruthika – Appellant
Versus
Arunkumar – Respondent
CMP No.2063 of 2026
For the Appellants/Petitioners: K.Sudhakar
For the Respondents: R.A.Shinusha
In matrimonial transfer petitions, the court prioritizes the convenience and circumstances of the wife, especially when she demonstrates genuine hardship or travel difficulties, to ensure access to justice.
Headnote:The proceedings arise from a petition for transfer of a matrimonial case filed under S.24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. The petitioner, the wife, sought to transfer a divorce proceeding initiated under S.13(1)(i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, from the Subordinate Court, Kangeyam, to the Family Court, Coimbatore, citing significant travel difficulties and personal hardship. The court considered the balance of convenience and the established legal precedents regarding the transfer of matrimonial proceedings. The core issue is whether the wife's logistical constraints and difficulties in travelling justify the transfer of the matrimonial case from the jurisdiction where it was filed. Relying on settled principles, the court observed that where a spouse, particularly in matrimonial disputes, demonstrates sufficient cause or financial and physical hardship in litigating in a distant jurisdiction, the interests of justice mandate a transfer to ensure effective access to court. The Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is allowed, and the proceedings are ordered to be transferred to the Family Court, Coimbatore.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. overview of the petition for transfer based on geographical inconvenience for a wife. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. arguments presented regarding the transfer of matrimonial proceedings. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. application of supreme court precedents regarding the transfer of litigation based on spouse's hardship. (Para 6) |
| 4. final order granting the transfer based on the established legal grounds. (Para 7) |
ORDER
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner (wife) and the learned counsel for the respondent (husband).
2. The respondent (wife) in H.M.O.P.No.116 of 2025 on the file of the Sub Court, Kangeyam, is the petitioner herein. The aforestated HMOP was taken by the husband under Section 13(1) (i-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, for an order of divorce.
3. The petitioner (wife) would aver that she is residing at Coimbatore and she finds it difficult to travel from Coimbatore to Kangeyam for about 80 kms one-way. She would further aver that she has to travel nearly five hours for attending the Court hearings without assistance of any person.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would reiterate the grounds set out in the petition and seeks for transfer of the aforestated HMOP from the file of the Sub Court, Kangeyam to the Family Court, Coimbatore.
5. Counter affidavit has been filed by the respondent. Learned counsel for the respondent would state that if the O.P. is transferred as prayed for by the petitioner, it will cause inconvenience and hardship to the respondent and she has not made out any exceptional circumstances warranting transfer of the proceedings.
6. The principles regarding transfer petitions, more specifically in the matters of matrimonial cases are well settled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the following cases:-
“i. In AIR 2000 SC 3512 (1) (Mona Aresh Goel vs. Aresh Satya Goel), 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.
ii. In 2000 (10) SCC 304 (Geeta Heera Vs.
Harish Chander Heera), the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that where the petitioner's wife has pleaded lack of money, the same has to be considered.
Iii. In Lalita A. Ranga Vs. Ajay Champalal Ranja reported in (2009) 9 SCC 355, wherein the wife, who was having small child and she was finding it difficult to travel from Jaipur to Bombay, and the Hon’ble Apex Court accepting her request ordered the transfer petition in favour of the wife transferring the transfer petition from Family Court at Bandra in Mumbai to the Family Court at Jaipur.”
7. In consideration of the above said details, the request of the petitioner herein / wife appears to be based on justifiable cause and accordingly, this Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is allowed. Sequel to this, H.MO.P.No.116 of 2025 pending on the file of the Subordinate Court, Kangeyam is withdrawn and transferred to the file of the Additional Family Court, Coimbatore. The learned Judge of the Subordinate Court, Kangeyam, shall send the case records to the Additional Family Court, Coimbatore, forthwith. The learned Judge, of Additional Family Court, Coimbatore, on receipt of the records, shall take all effective steps to try and dispose of the matter in accordance with law at the earliest. No Costs. Consequently, connected Civil Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
