TR CMP/196/2026 of Menaka Alias Sindhu Vs Arun Neelamegan

Tr.C.M.P.No.196 of 2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 02.04.2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE Mrs.JUSTICE R.KALAIMATHI Tr.C.M.P.No.196 of 2026 and C.M.P.No.6027 of 2026 Menaka (a) Sindhu ... Petitioner Vs Arun Neelamegan ... Respondent PRAYER: Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed under Section 24 of Civil Procedure Code, to withdraw the H.M.O.P.No.92 of 2025 pending before the Subordinate Court, Pollachi and transfer the same to the Family Court, Chennai. For Petitioner : Mr.V.P.Arivan for M/s.Surana and Surana For Respondent : Mr.A.Deivasigamani ORDER Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondent. 1/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Tr.C.M.P.No.196 of 2026 2. The respondent/wife in H.M.O.P.No.92 of 2025 on the file of Subordinate Court, Pollachi is the petitioner herein. 3. Petitioner/wife would aver that she finds it difficult to travel from Chennai to Pollachi for all the Court hearings. 4. Reiterating the aforestated contentions, the learned counsel for the petitioner would add that the petitioner has to travel to the distance of 536 Kms., up and down 1072 Kms., to take part in the proceedings and seeks for transfer of above said H.M.O.P.No.92 of 2025 to the Family Court, Chennai. 5. The learned counsel for the respondent would strenuously argue that as the respondent is working at Pollachi, he will have difficulties to attend the Court in Chennai. 6. The principles regarding transfer petitions, more specifically in the matters of matrimonial cases are well settled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the following cases:- “i. In AIR 2000 SC 3512 (1) (Mona Aresh Goel vs. Aresh Satya Goel), when the wife 2/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Tr.C.M.P.No.196 of 2026 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. ii. In 2000 (10) SCC 304 (Geeta Heera Vs. Harish Chander Heera), the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that where the petitioner's wife has pleaded lack of money, the same has to be considered. iii. In Lalita A. Ranga Vs. Ajay Champalal Ranja reported in (2009) 9 SCC 355 , wherein the wife, who was having small child and she was finding it difficult to travel from Jaipur to Bombay, and the Hon’ble Apex Court accepting her request ordered the transfer petition in favour of the wife transferring the transfer petition from Family Court at Bandra in Mumbai to the Family Court at Jaipur.” 7. On perusal of short and long cause title, it appears that petitioner is resident of Chennai. 8. In consideration of the above said details, the request of the petitioner herein / wife appears to be based on justifiable cause and accordingly, this Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is allowed. Sequel to this, H.M. O.P.No.92 of 20 25 pending on the file of the Subordinate 3/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Tr.C.M.P.No.196 of 2026 Court, Pollachi is withdrawn and transferred to the file of the VI Additional Family Court, Chennai. The learned Judge of the VI Additional Family Court, Chennai, on receipt of the records shall take all effective steps to dispose of the matter in accordance with law at the earliest. No Costs. Consequently, connected Civil Miscellaneous Petition is closed. 02.04.2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No ssn To 1. The Subordinate Court, Pollachi. 2. The VI Additional Family Court, Chennai. 3. The Section Officer, V.R.Section, High Court, Madras. 4/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Tr.C.M.P.No.196 of 2026 R.KALAIMATHI, J., ssn Tr.C.M.P.No.196 of 2026 and C.M.P.No.6027 of 2026 02.04.2026 5/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis