← Library
Madras High CourtTR CMP(MD)/395/2025allowed

Kaleeshwari v. Jeevanantham

2026-06-16Honourable Mr Justice K.Murali Shankar6 pages

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 16.06.2026

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.MURALI SHANKAR Tr.C.M.P (MD).No.395 of 2025 and C.M.P(MD)No.10784 of 2025 Kaleeshwari : Petitioner Vs Jeevanantham : Respondent Prayer : This Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition filed under Section 24 of the Civil Procedure Code praying to withdraw the petition in F.C.O.P.No.178 of 2025 on the file of the Family Court, Erode and transfer the same to the file of Family Court, Thoothukudi.

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Balakrishnan, For Respondent : Mr.T.Pradeep.

O R D E R

The Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition has been filed seeking orders to withdraw the petition in F.C.O.P.No.178 of 2025 on the file of the Family Court, Erode and transfer the same to the file of Family Court, Thoothukudi. 1/6

2. It is not in dispute that the marriage between the parties was solemnized on 21.11.2016 as per Hindu rites and customs and due to their wed-lock, they were blessed with two female children and that subsequently, there arose some misunderstanding between them and they are living separately.

3. It is also not in dispute that the respondent has filed a petition in F.C.O.P.No.178 of 2025, seeking divorce and the same is pending on the file of the Family Court, Erode and that the petitioner has laid the maintenance claim in M.C.No.65 of 2024 on the file of the Family Court, Thoothukudi and since the respondent had remained ex-parte, the maintenance claim was disposed of on 05.02.2026. He would submit that the petitioner is residing at Thoothukudi along with two female children and finds it very difficult to travel to Erode to attend all the hearings.

4. The respondent filed counter affidavit raising objections. The learned counsel for the respondent would submit that the petitioner has not assigned any valid reason or ground for seeking transfer of the case and that, therefore, the respondent is opposing the transfer.

2/6

5. In the case of N.C.V.Aishwarya Vs. A.S.Saravana Karthik Sha reported in 2022 Live Law (SC) 627, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has reiterated the position with generally, it is the wife's convenience, which must be looked at while considering the transfer petition under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure and the relevant passage is extracted hereunder : "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.", the bench observed."

7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and taking note of the fact that the petitioner is residing at Thoothukudi, this Court is inclined to allow this petition. Accordingly, the petition in F.C.O.P.No.178 of 2025, is ordered to be withdrawn from the file of the Family Court, Erode and transfer 3/6

the same to the Family Court, Thoothukudi. The learned Judge, Family Court, Erode, is hereby directed to transmit the entire records in F.C.O.P.No.178 of 2025 to the file of the Family Court, Thootukudi, within a period of 10 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and on receiving the case bundle, the learned Judge, Family Court, Thoothukudi, is directed to take up the petition on file and proceed in accordance with law.

8. With the above direction, the Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition stands allowed. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. No costs.

16.06.2026 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Internet :Yes/No das 4/6

To 1.The Judge, Family Court, Erode.

2.The Judge, Family Court, Thoothukudi.

3.The Section Officer, VR Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

5/6

K.MURALI SHANKAR, J.

DAS Order made in Tr.C.M.P (MD).No.395 of 2025 and C.M.P(MD)No.10784 of 2025 16.06.2026 6/6