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.

Suryakala Vs N.Pradeepkumar

Suryakala vs N.Pradeepkumar

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Mar 13, 2026
~4 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1483972

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/1006/2025

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Suryakala

Respondent

N.Pradeepkumar

Excerpt

.....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. on perusal of petition filed in h.m.o.p.no.15 of 2025, it appears that petitioner/husband is the resident of salem district (elampillai) and the respondent/wife is the resident of thiruvallur district (ambattur).7. in consideration of the above said details, the request of thepetitioner 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 sequel to this, h.m.o.p.no.15 of 2025 pending on the file of the family court, salem is page3 of 5 withdrawn and transferred to the file of the sub court at ambattur, thiruvallur district. the sub court at ambattur, 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. 13-03-2026 index: yes/nospeaking/non-speaking orderneutral citation: yes/no mac to1. the sub court, ambattur2. the family court, salem page4 of 5r.kalaimathi, j.mac and cmp no.22566 of 2025 13-03-2026 page5 of 5

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 13-03-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE R. KALAIMATHI and CMP No.22566 of 2025 Suryakala, W/o. N. Pradeepkumar, No.25, Lingam Street, Mettupalayam, Kathirvedu, Puzhal, Thiruvallur. Now Residing at No.1, Rose Garden Apartments, New Street, Kallikuppam Aarch, Ambattur, Thiruvallur District - 600053. ..Petitioner(s) Vs. N.Pradeepkumar S/o. Nagarajan, No.7-2/8, Muthaiya Street, Elampillai Post, Salem - 637502. ..Respondent(s) Prayer: Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed under section 24 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, to withdraw and transfer the HMOP. No.15 of 2025 on the file of the Family Court at Salem to Sub-Court at Ambattur, Thiruvallur District. For Petitioner(s): Mr.J.Paulraj For Respondent(s): Mr..K.Rajendra Prasad Page1 of 5

ORDER

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondent.

2. The petitioner who is the respondent / wife in H.M.O.P.No.15 of 2025

on the file of Family Court, Salem has filed this Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition seeking to transfer the said H.M.O.P., to the Sub Court at Ambattur, Thiruvallur District, by stating that she is not in a position to travel to Salem from Ambattur.

3. Reiterating the said contention, the learned counsel for the petitioner

would further add that she is living in her parents’ home along with her aged parents at Ambattur, Thiruvallur District and she finds it difficult to travel from Ambattur to Salem for all the hearing dates.

4. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondent would submit that on hearing dates alone she needs to travel and sought for dismissal of the Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition.

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:- Page2 of 5

“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. On perusal of petition filed in H.M.O.P.No.15 of 2025, it appears that petitioner/husband is the resident of Salem District (Elampillai) and the respondent/wife is the resident of Thiruvallur District (Ambattur).

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 allowed. Sequel to this, H.M.O.P.No.15 of 2025 pending on the file of the Family Court, Salem is Page3 of 5 withdrawn and transferred to the file of the Sub Court at Ambattur, Thiruvallur District. The Sub Court at Ambattur, 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. 13-03-2026 Index: Yes/No

Speaking/Non-speaking order

Neutral Citation: Yes/No MAC To

1. The Sub Court, Ambattur

2. The Family Court, Salem Page4 of 5

R.KALAIMATHI, J.

MAC and CMP No.22566 of 2025 13-03-2026 Page5 of 5

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial