Nithya vs Selvakumar

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Decided Mar 24, 2026

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1487791

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/1487791
Court: Chennai High Court
Judge: Honourable Mrs.Justice R. Kalaimathi
Decided On: Mar 24, 2026
Case Number: TR CMP/1265/2024

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Nithya

Respondent

Selvakumar

Excerpt

.....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. page2 of 4iii. 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. in consideration of the above said details, the request of the petitioner/ wife appears to be based on justifiable cause, and accordingly, this transfer civil miscellaneous petition stands ordered. sequel to this, h.m.o.p.no.96 of 2024, pending on the file of the additional sub court at thiruchengode, namakkal district, is hereby withdrawn and the same is transferred to the file of the family court at erode. the family court, erode, on receipt of the records, to try and dispose of the matter in accordance with law at the earliest. no costs. consequently, the connected c.m.p.no.27441 of 2024 is closed.index : yes / nospeaking / non speaking orderneutral citation : yes / no kas page3 of 4r.kalaimathi, j.kas to. 1.the additional sub court thiruchengode namakkal district 2.the family court erode page4 of 4

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 24-03-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE R. KALAIMATHI Nithya W/o.Selvakumar ..Petitioner(s) Vs
1. Selvakumar S/o.Late Muthusamy
2. Selvakumar
S/o.Rasu ..Respondent(s) PRAYER: Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition filed under Section 24 r/w 151 of C.P.C. seeking to withdraw the HMOP No.96/2024 pending on the file of the Additional Sub Court, Thiruchengode, Namakkal District and transfer the same to the Family court, Erode. For Petitioner(s): Mr.G.Pavendhan For Respondent(s): No Appearance

ORDER

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

2. The petitioner, who is the respondent / wife in H.M.O.P.No.96 of 2024

on the file of Additional Sub-Court, Thiruchengode, Namakkal District, has filed this Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition seeking to transfer the said H.M.O.P.No.96 of 2024, to the Family Court at Erode by stating that she is not in a position to travel to Thiruchengode (Namakkal District) from Erode. Page1 of 4

3.The petitioner / wife would aver that she is residing at Kollampalayam, Railway Colony, Erode. She has taken out a maintenance petition in M.C.No.24 of 2024, which is pending before the Family Court, Erode. She would also aver that she has got one boy child and she finds it difficult to travel very often to Thiruchengode, Namakkal.

4.Despite the notice to respondents 1 and 2 and their names having been printed in the Cause List, they neither appeared before this Court nor entered appearance through their 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 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. Page2 of 4

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. In consideration of the above said details, the request of the petitioner

/ wife appears to be based on justifiable cause, and accordingly, this Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition stands ordered. Sequel to this, H.M.O.P.No.96 of 2024, pending on the file of the Additional Sub Court at Thiruchengode, Namakkal District, is hereby withdrawn and the same is transferred to the file of the Family Court at Erode. The Family Court, Erode, on receipt of the records, to try and dispose of the matter in accordance with law at the earliest. No Costs. Consequently, the connected C.M.P.No.27441 of 2024 is closed.

Index : Yes / No

Speaking / Non Speaking order

Neutral Citation : Yes / No kas Page3 of 4

R.KALAIMATHI, J.

kas To. 1.The Additional Sub Court Thiruchengode Namakkal District 2.The Family Court Erode Page4 of 4

Same Court & Year Chennai · 2026 Same Parties Nithya vs Selvakumar Same Judge Honourable Mrs.Justice R. Kalaimathi