TR CMP/976/2025 of S. Krishnaveni alias Saranya Vs S.Ganeshkumar

TR CMP No. 976 of 2025 __________ Page1 of 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 24-04-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE R. KALAIMATHI TR CMP No.976 of 2025 and CMP No.22046 of 2025 S. Krishnaveni alias Saranya W/o. S. Ganeshkumar ..Petitioner(s) Vs S.Ganeshkumar S/o. Surendran ..Respondent(s) PRAYER: Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition filed under Section 24 of C.P.C. seeking to withdraw the proceedings in H.M.O.P.No.530 of 2025 from the file of the Family Court at Nagercoil and transfer the same to the Family Court, Chengalpattu. For Petitioner(s): Ms.D.Arokia Mary Sophia For Respondent(s): No Appearance ORDER Heard learned counsel for the petitioner (wife). 2.The respondent (wife) in HMOP No.530 of 2025, on the file of the Family Court at Nagercoil, is the petitioner herein. 3.None represents the respondent. 4.The petitioner would aver that she is residing at Chengalpattu with her https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis TR CMP No. 976 of 2025 __________ Page2 of 4 son at her parental home, Chengalpattu. She would further aver that she is not in a position to travel to Nagercoil with her baby to attend Court proceedings and she has to spend a lot of money for each and every travel. 5.Learned counsel for the petitioner would reiterate the grounds set out in the Transfer CMP and seeks to transfer the aforesaid HMOP from the file of Family Court, Nagercoil to the file of Family Court at Chengalpattu. 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 pleaded that she was unable to bear the travelling 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 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis TR CMP No. 976 of 2025 __________ Page3 of 4 of the wife transferring the transfer petition from Family Court at Bandra in Mumbai to the Family Court at Jaipur.” 7. 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 ordered. Sequel to this, H.M.O.P.No.530 of 2025 pending on the file of the Family Court, Nagercoil is withdrawn and transferred to the file of the Family Court at Chengalpattu. Learned Judge of the Family Court, Chengalpattu, on receipt of the records to try and dispose of the matter in accordance with law at the earliest. No Costs. Consequently, connected Civil Miscellaneous Petition is closed. 24-04-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No kas To. 1.The Family Court Nagercoil 2.The Family Court Chengalpattu https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis TR CMP No. 976 of 2025 __________ Page4 of 4 R.KALAIMATHI, J. kas TR CMP No.976 of 2025 and CMP No.22046 of 2025 24-04-2026 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis