S. Mohanapriya Vs. S. Devendran

S. Mohanapriya vs S. Devendran

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Madurai Decided Nov 14, 2016

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1187170

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1187170
Court: Chennai Madurai High Court
Judge: S.M. Subramaniam
Decided On: Nov 14, 2016
Case Number: Tr.C.M.P.(MD).No. 397 of 2015 & M.P.(MD) No. 1 of 2015
Subject: Service Tax

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Service Tax

Key legal issue: Service Tax

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

S. Mohanapriya

Respondent

S. Devendran

Excerpt

(prayer: transfer civil miscellaneous petition filed under section 24 of the code of civil procedure, to withdraw the hmop no.46 of 2012 pending before sub court, dindigul and transfer the same to the family court, erode district or any competent court, erode.) 1. the present petition for transfer is filed to withdraw and transfer the case in hmop no.46 of 2012 pending on the file of sub court, dindigul to the file of family court, erode district. 2. the marriage between the petitioner and the respondent was solemnized on 23.08.2007 at dindigul and out of the wedlock a female child was born on 29.11.2008 and now the child is with the custody of the petitioner. due to the strained relationship between the parties, the petitioner left the matrimonial home and residing with her parents. the contention of the petitioner is that she filed mc no.8 of 2012 before the judicial magistrate, dindigul for maintenance and the respondent filed hmop no.46 of 2012 before the sub court, dindigul, for restitution of conjugal rights. the only reason set out in the petition is that it will be very difficult for her to travel to dindigul along with the child to defend the case filed by the respondent in hmop no.46 of 2012. 3. the facts stated by the petitioner are neither candid nor convincing in view of the fact that both the petitioner and the respondent are residing in dindigul. the petitioner herself filed a petition for maintenance in m.c.no.8 of 2012 before the judicial magistrate, dindigul. in view of these facts, the petitioner has not come out with a clear ground for seeking transfer and this court is not inclined to consider the petition. the transfer petition is dismissed. no costs. connected miscellaneous petition is also dismissed.

Full Judgment

(Prayer: Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition filed under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, to withdraw the HMOP No.46 of 2012 pending before Sub Court, Dindigul and transfer the same to the Family Court, Erode District or any competent Court, Erode.)

1. The present petition for transfer is filed to withdraw and transfer the case in HMOP No.46 of 2012 pending on the file of Sub Court, Dindigul to the file of Family Court, Erode District.

2. The marriage between the petitioner and the respondent was solemnized on 23.08.2007 at Dindigul and out of the wedlock a female child was born on 29.11.2008 and now the child is with the custody of the petitioner. Due to the strained relationship between the parties, the petitioner left the matrimonial home and residing with her parents. The contention of the petitioner is that she filed MC No.8 of 2012 before the Judicial Magistrate, Dindigul for maintenance and the respondent filed HMOP No.46 of 2012 before the Sub Court, Dindigul, for restitution of conjugal rights. The only reason set out in the petition is that it will be very difficult for her to travel to Dindigul along with the child to defend the case filed by the respondent in HMOP No.46 of 2012.

3. The facts stated by the petitioner are neither candid nor convincing in view of the fact that both the petitioner and the respondent are residing in Dindigul. The petitioner herself filed a petition for maintenance in M.C.No.8 of 2012 before the Judicial Magistrate, Dindigul. In view of these facts, the petitioner has not come out with a clear ground for seeking transfer and this Court is not inclined to consider the petition. The transfer petition is dismissed. No costs. Connected miscellaneous petition is also dismissed.

Same Court & Year Chennai Madurai · 2016 Same Parties S. Mohanapriya vs S. Devendran Same Subject Service Tax Same Judge S.M. Subramaniam