Amruthaa v. Srinivasan

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 15.10.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN Tr.CMP.No.534 of 2025 and C.M.P.No.13199 of 2025 Amrutha ... Petitioner Vs Srinivasan ... Respondent Prayer:- Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition filed under Section 24 of the CPC, to withdraw HMOP No.24 of 2025 pending before the Subordinate Court, Ranipet and transfer the same to the Subordinate Court, Ambattur or any other competent Court in Tiruvallur district to try the same.

For Petitioner :

Mr.G.Anbuchezheiyan For Respondent :

Mr.P.Suresh for Mr.V.Sivalingam

O R D E R

This petition has been filed to withdraw HMOP No.24 of 2025 from the file of the Subordinate Court, Ranipet and to transfer the same to the Subordinate Court, Ambattur or any other competent Court in

Thiruvallur district to try the same.

2. Heard the learned counsel on both sides.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the marriage between the petitioner and respondent was solemnized on 01.03.2024 as per Hindu rites and customs. The respondent / husband has filed a divorce petition in H.M.O.P.No.24 of 2025 before the Subordinate Court, Ranipet. The learned counsel would further submit that the petitioner is residing in her parental house and facing difficult to travel all the way from Ambattur to Ranipet which is 230 kms distance.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent submitted that the respondent has no objection in allowing this petition, whereas the allegation levelled against the respondent/husband are false.

5. I have gone through the affidavit filed in support this petition

and I find merit in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner.

6. At this juncture, it may be apposite to cite the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in N.C.V.Aishwarya vs. A.S.Saravana Karthik (MANU/SC/1211/2022 : 2022 Live Law (SC) 627) held at paras 9 and 10, which reads as under:- "9. The cardinal principle for exercise of power under section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure is that the ends of justice should demand the transfer of the suit, appeal or other proceeding. In matrimonial matters, wherever Courts are called upon to consider the plea of transfer, the Courts have to take into consideration the economic soundness of both the parties, the social strata of the spouses and their behavioural pattern, their standard of life prior to the marriage and subsequent thereto and the circumstances of both the parties in eking out their livelihood and under whose protective umbrella they are seeking their sustenance to life. Given the prevailing socioeconomic paradigm in the Indian society, generally, it is the wife's convenience which must be looked at while considering transfer.

(emphasis supplied) 10.Further, when two or more proceedings are pending in different Courts between the same parties which raise common question of fact and law, and when the decisions in the cases are interdependent, it is desirable that they should be tried together by the same Judge so as to avoid multiplicity in trial of the same issues and conflict of decisions".

7. It is also relevant to refer the decision made by the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court in TR.CMP(MD)No.108 of 2010 dated 03.03.2011, wherein, it has observed as below:- ''18.It is true that section 19 of the Hindu Marriage Act, has been amended by insertion of proviso of (iii)(a) to section 19. Of Course, this amended section 19(iii)(a) gives special preference to the wife to file a petition or defending the case of the husband before the Court within whose jurisdiction she resides. The intention of the legislator is to safe-guard the interest and rights of the women, who are being subjected to harassment and cruelty. But this special preference conferred under section 19 (iii)(a) of the Hindu Marriage Act shall not be used to wreck vengeance on the husband. There must be a justifiable cause to select the jurisdiction of the Court where she resides.''

8. In the light of the proposition laid down in the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in N.C.V.Aishwarya case cited supra and also in the light of the observation made by this Court, wherein, it has been held that convenience of the wife has to be considered, while transferring the case from one Court to another, there can be no impediment for allowing this petition as prayed for.

9. Accordingly, this Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is

allowed. The case in H.M.O.P.No.24 of 2025 is hereby withdrawn from the file of the Subordinate Court, Ranipet and transferred to the file of the Subordinate Court, Ambattur. No costs. Consequently, connected Civil Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

15.10.2025 dpq Index : Yes/No Speaking order : Yes/No Neutral Case Citation : Yes/No To

1. The Subordinate Court, Ranipet.

2. The Subordinate Court, Ambattur.

M. JOTHIRAMAN, J.

dpq

Tr.CMP.No.534 of 2025 and C.M.P.No.13199 of 2025 15.10.2025