SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

R.Mythili vs R.Satish on 21 January, 2020

TR.C.M.P. No.548 of 2019

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 21.01.2020

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM

TR.C.M.P.No.548 of 2019
C.M.P.No.15375 of 2019

R.Mythili ..Appellant
Vs.

R.Satish .. Respondent

PRAYER: Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition filed under Section 24 of
the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 to withdraw and transfer the petition in
H.M.O.P.No579 of 2019, on the file of Family Court, Madurai to Sub-Court
Rasipuram.

For Appellants : Mr.V.Lakshminarayanan

For Respondents : Mr.M.Gurudas

ORDER

The Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed to transfer

H.M.O.P.No579 of 2019, on the file of the Family Court, Madurai, to Sub-

Court Rasipuram, wherein the petitioner/wife of the respondent has

already instituted a maintenance proceedings in M.C.No.2 of 2019, which

is pending on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Rasipuram.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner states that the marriage

between the petitioner and the respondent was solemnized on

02.02.2009,
http://www.judis.nic.in as per the Hindu rites and customs, in Arulmigu Sree
TR.C.M.P. No.548 of 2019

Veerakeshwara Kovil Patanam Village, Rasipuram. A girl child was born

on 14.03.2016 namely S.Varshika. Unfortunately, the couple lost their

child on 03.07.2016. Thereafter, they moved to Madurai wherein the

respondent is working. On account of some difference of opinion, the

petitioner left her husband and now residing along with her parents at

Rasipuram.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner

is not employed and is now leading her life with the support of her

parents. Therefore, it would be difficult to travel from Rasipuram to

Madurai which is approximately 400 kms. In respect of H.M.O.P.No.579

of 2019, which is pending before the Family Court, Madurai, the

petitioner has to appear on hearing date and it may not be possible for

spending money and traveling for such a distance of about 400 kms.

4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent

opposed the contention by stating that the respondent is working as a

Drug Inspector at Madurai and the contention of the respondent is that

the petitioner had ill treated him and caused cruelty and voluntarily

deserted him and now living separately for the past about four years.

Thus, the respondent filed a petition for dissolution of marriage.

5. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent
http://www.judis.nic.in
TR.C.M.P. No.548 of 2019

states that there is a possibility of settlement between the parties and

therefore, the matter may be referred to the Mediation Center. However,

the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner states that

there is no information with reference to the proposal for settlement and

therefore, he is not in a position to ascertain the same. It is always open

to the parties to settle the issues amicably. The dispute being related to

matrimonial issue, the parties are at liberty to go for conciliation and

settle the disputes amicably and opt for reunion. However, for the

purpose of such settlement or negotiation, the transfer civil

miscellaneous petition need not be kept pending. Under these

circumstances, this Court is inclined to transfer the civil miscellaneous

petition for passing final orders. Admittedly, both the petitioner and the

respondent are living separately. The petitioner is now residing with her

parents at Rasipuram. The petition for dissolution of marriage is

instituted and now pending before the Family Court, Madurai. The

principles with regard to the transfer petitions, more specifically, in

matrimonial cases, the Courts are bound to consider the hardships or

prejudices, if any to be caused to wife and the High Court of Madras also

interpreted Section 19(iii)(a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and the

following principles are laid down, which is extracted hereunder:

“(i)The Hon’ble Division Bench of the High Court of Madras in W.A.No.1181
of 2009, dated 09.07.2010 has held as follows:-

http://www.judis.nic.in
TR.C.M.P. No.548 of 2019

”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 the Hon’ble

Supreme Court:-

”16.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.

In 2000 (10) SCC 304, the Honourable Supreme Court has held that where the

petitioner’s wife has pleaded lack of money, the same has to be considered.

In 2000 (9) SCC 355, the wife has filed a petition to transfer the proceedings

initiated by the husband for divorce, at Bombay. The place of residence of the wife was at

Jaipur, Rajasthan. In that case, the petitioner is having a small child and that she

pleaded difficulty in going all the way from Jaipur to Bombay to contest the proceedings

from time to time. Considering the distance and the difficulties faced by the wife, the

Supreme Court has allowed the transfer petition.
http://www.judis.nic.in In a decision reported in 2005 (12) SCC 395, the wife has sought for transfer of
TR.C.M.P. No.548 of 2019

matrimonial proceedings and a divorce petition has been filed by the respondent’s

husband at Baikunthpur to be transferred to Allahabad, where the petitioner’s wife was

residing, on the ground that it would be difficult for her to undertake such long distance

journey, particularly in circumstances, in which she finds that the proceedings under

Section 125 Cr.P.C. was already pending before the Family Court, Allahabad.

Considering the difficulties faced by the wife and also the long distance journey, the

Honourable Supreme Court was pleased to order transfer of the proceedings to

Allahabad.”

6. Considering the fact that the petitioner is living with her parents

at Rasipuram and not employed elsewhere, this Court is inclined to

consider the transfer civil miscellaneous petition. Accordingly, the

transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition stands allowed and H.M.O.P.No.579

OF 2019 now pending before the Family Court, Madurai is transferred to

the Sub-Court, Rasipuram, Nammakkal District. Accordingly, the transfer

Civil Miscellaneous petition stands allowed. No costs.

21.01.2020

ssb
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order

To

1. Family Court,
Madurai.

2. Sub-Court, Rasipuram.

http://www.judis.nic.in
TR.C.M.P. No.548 of 2019

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.

ssb

Tr.C.M.P.No.548 of 2019
C.M.P.No.15375 of 2019

21.01.2020

http://www.judis.nic.in

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2020 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation