Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2008 DIGILAW 4543 (MAD)

M. Kala v. Renganathan @ Kannan

2008-12-05

M.VENUGOPAL

body2008
Judgment : 1. No appearance on the side of the respondent. The petitioner/ wife has filed the present Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition praying for issuance of an order by this Court to withdraw the HMOP.No.143 of 2008 from the file of Family Court, Madurai and to transfer the same to the file of First Additional Family Court, Chennai, to be tried along with M.C.No.216 of 2008. 2. The petitioner is the wife of the respondent. The petitioners marriage with the respondent has taken place on 12.02.2006 at Arulmighu Sri Mariamman Kovil Thirumana Mandapam at Madurai according to Hindu rites and customs. As a result of wedlock, a male child has been born on 07.02.2007. It appears that the respondent/husband has initiated the matrimonial proceedings HMOP.No.143 of 2008 on the file of the Family Court, Madurai. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner/wife submits that the petitioner/wife and her son are under the care of her parents and that her father is a retired State Government employee and the parties are living separately ever since 12.03.2008 and that she finds it difficult to go over to Madurai in connection with the case HMOP.No.143 of 2008 on the file of Family Court, Madurai and she has to attend every hearing of the case along with a male companion and that due to the financial problem she is not in a position to spend any sum towards travel expenses and therefore prays for allowing the petition in the interest of justice. 4. It is to be noted that in regard to the Transfer Application pertaining to the matrimonial proceedings, the Court of Law has to take into consideration the convenience of the parties. However, the convenience of the wife must be given primary importance, over that of the husband. 4. It is to be noted that in regard to the Transfer Application pertaining to the matrimonial proceedings, the Court of Law has to take into consideration the convenience of the parties. However, the convenience of the wife must be given primary importance, over that of the husband. As far as the present case is concerned, since the petitioner/wife has instituted M.C.No.216 of 2008 on the file of the First Additional Family Court, Chennai and since she is residing with her parents at Adayar in Chennai and because of the fact that she has some difficulty in attending the matrimonial proceedings case HMOP.No.143 of 2008 pending on the file of Family Court, Madurai and since she has to take care of her 1-1/2 years male child and taking note of the over all assessment and facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the considered view that the balance of convenience is in favour of the petitioner/wife and in that view of the matter, this Court allows the Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition in the interest of justice. 5. In the result, the Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is allowed. The matrimonial Proceedings case HMOP.No.143 of 2008 is directed to be transferred from the file of the Family Court, Madurai to the file of First Additional Family Court, Chennai and the Family Court, Madurai is further directed to transfer the said matrimonial proceedings within a week from today and on receipt of the records, the First Additional Family Court, Chennai is directed to take the aforesaid matrimonial proceedings to its file and to dispose of the same after providing due opportunities to all parties concerned. It is open to the First Additional Family Court, Chennai to take a decision in regard to the joint trial of the said case with that of M.C.No.216 of 2008. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. However, there will be no orders as to costs.