HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
K.MALARVIZHI – Appellant
Versus
A.KANDASAMY – Respondent
TR CMP 131/2020
['M/S K VAIDHYANATHAN', '', 'A SARAVANAN', 'm/s k murali', '', 'L RAJENDRAN', 'A SYED MUSTHABA']
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 27.08.2020
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAJA
Tr.C.M.P.No.131 of 2020
K.Malarvizhi
.. Petitioner
Versus
A.Kandasamy
.. Respondent
Prayer: Petition has been filed under Section 24 of the Civil
Procedure Code praying to withdraw H.M.O.P.No.52 of 2015
pending on the file of learned Sub-Court, Sangakiri, and to
transfer the same to the file of learned Principal Family
Court, Chennai, to be tried along with H.M.O.P.No.3115 of
2015.
For Petitioner
: Mr.K.Vaidhyanathan
For Respondent
: K.Murali
O R D E R
Heard the parties through Video Conferencing due to
COVID-19 pandemic.
2.
Mrs.K.Malarvizhi/petitioner
herein,
wife
of
Mr.A.Kandasamy/respondent herein, has filed this Transfer
Civil Miscellaneous Petition seeking to transfer H.M.O.P.No.52
of 2015 from the file of learned Sub-Court, Sangakiri, to the
file of learned Principal Family Court, Chennai, to be tried
along with H.M.O.P.No.3115 of 2015 filed by the wife seeking
for divorce. The above said HMOP No.52 of 2015 was filed by
the respondent/husband seeking for restitution of conjugal
rights.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/wife
submitted that the marriage between the petitioner and the
respondent was solemnized on 13.06.2002 at Sri Gurunandhasamy
Kovil, Salem, as per Hindu Rites and Customs. Out of the said
wedlock, they were blessed with three children, namely, two
daughters by name Bharkavi and Bhabitha, aged about 16 years
and 15 years, respectively and one male chile by name
DharshanRaj, aged about 7 years. Due to some difference of
opinion, they got separated in the year 2012 and subsequently,
the petitioner/wife filed H.M.O.P.No.3115 of 2015 on the file
https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/
of learned Principal Family Court, Chennai, seeking for
divorce.
Whileso, the respondent/husband also filed
H.M.O.P.No.52 of 2015 on the file of learned Sub-Court,
Sankagiri, seeking for restitution of conjugal rights. It is
further submitted that since the petitioner/wife is residing
at Chennai, it is difficult for her to undertake long journey
from Chennai to Sankagiri, to attend each and every hearing
and therefore, the case filed by the husband may be
transferred to the file of learned Principal Family Court,
Chennai, to try along with H.M.O.P.No.3115 of 2015 filed by
the wife.
4. Opposing the above prayer, learned counsel appearing
for the respondent/husband submitted that this transfer
petition is not legally sustainable in law, since
H.M.O.P.No.52 of 2015 sought to be transferred in the present
transfer petition has already ended on 31.01.2018 in an
expartee decree for restitution conjugal rights and
thereafter, the petitioner/wife has not moved any application
for restoration of exparte decree. Denying such submission,
it is submitted by the learned counsel for the wife that the
wife has already filed restoration application and it is to be
taken on file.
5. This Court is of the view that even if he has filed an
application for restoration, unless it is restored to the file
of learned Sub-Court, Sankagiri, she cannot seek for transfer
of H.M.O.P.No.52 of 2015 as it was admittedly ended on
31.01.2018 in an exparte decree for restitution of conjugal
rights. It is submitted by learned counsel for the husband
that in the restoration application filed by the wife, no
notice is ordered till date. Secondly, three children are
under the custody of father/respondent herein and they are
attending the school at Salem. Therefore, this Court does not
find any balance of convenience in favour of wife and
accordingly, this Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is
dismissed. Consequently, connected CMP.No.4506 of 2020 is
closed.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CCC)
//True copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
rkm
To
1.The Subordinate Judge,