Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Sapthasri Vs Saravana Kumar

Sapthasri vs Saravana Kumar

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Mar 16, 2026
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1415239

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

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Chennai High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
TR CMP/56/2026

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Sapthasri

Respondent

Saravana Kumar

Excerpt

.....resident of denkanikottai taluk and she has initiated two proceedings against her husband and the same are pending as mentioned supra.7. in consideration of all the details mentioned supra,petitioner/wife request to transfer h.m.o.p.no.354 of 2025 which is pending before the family court, tirupur appears to be based on justifiable cause and accordingly, this transfer civil miscellaneous petition is allowed. sequel to this, h.m.o.p.no.354 of 2025 pending on the file of the family court, tirupur is withdrawn and transferred to the file of the subordinate court, denkanikottai, krishnagiri district, to be tried simultaneously with h.m.o.p.no.54 of 2025 and d.v.c.no.2 of2025. the subordinate court, denkanikottai 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. 16.03.2026 index: yes/nospeaking/non-speaking orderneutral citation: yes/no ssn to1. the family court, tirupur.2. the subordinate court, denkanikottai, krishnagiri district.3. the section officer, v.r.section, high court, madras. r.kalaimathi, j., ssn and c.m.p.no.1434 of 2026 16.03.2026

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 16.03.2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE Mrs.JUSTICE R.KALAIMATHI and C.M.P.No.1434 of 2026 Sapthasri ... Petitioner Vs Saravanakumar ... Respondent

PRAYER: Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed under Section 24 of Civil Procedure Code, to withdraw the H.M.O.P.No.354 of 2025 from the file of the Family Court, Tirupur, and transfer the same to the file of the Subordinate Judge Court, Denkanikottai, Krishnagiri District to be tried along with H.M.O.P.No.54 of 2025 and D.V.C.No.2 of 2025. For Petitioner : Mr.S.Sabarish For Respondent : No Appearance

ORDER

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.

2. This Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is taken out by the wife / respondent in H.M.O.P.No.354 of 2025 on the file of the Family Court, Tirupur.

3. Petitioner/wife would aver that she has instituted

H.M.O.P.No.54 of 2025 for restitution of conjugal rights under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 before the Subordinate Court, Denkanikottai and she has to travel from Rayakottai Village to Tirupur for more than 225 Kms., on the date of hearing and she finds it very difficult to travel to Tirupur. Hence this petition.

4. Despite receipt of notice and name being printed in the cause list, neither the respondent appeared nor represented through his counsel.

5. 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 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.”

6. From a perusal of case records, it appears that petitioner is the resident of Denkanikottai Taluk and she has initiated two proceedings against her husband and the same are pending as mentioned supra.

7. In consideration of all the details mentioned supra,

petitioner/wife request to transfer H.M.O.P.No.354 of 2025 which is pending before the Family Court, Tirupur appears to be based on justifiable cause and accordingly, this Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is allowed. Sequel to this, H.M.O.P.No.354 of 2025 pending on the file of the Family Court, Tirupur is withdrawn and transferred to the file of the Subordinate Court, Denkanikottai, Krishnagiri District, to be tried simultaneously with H.M.O.P.No.54 of 2025 and D.V.C.No.2 of

2025. The Subordinate Court, Denkanikottai 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. 16.03.2026 Index: Yes/No

Speaking/Non-speaking order

Neutral Citation: Yes/No ssn To

1. The Family Court, Tirupur.

2. The Subordinate Court, Denkanikottai, Krishnagiri District.

3. The Section Officer, V.R.Section, High Court, Madras. R.KALAIMATHI, J., ssn and C.M.P.No.1434 of 2026 16.03.2026

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial