TR CMP No. 1076 of 2025 __________ Page1 of 4 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 27-03-2026 CORAM THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE R. KALAIMATHI TR CMP No. 1076 of 2025 AND CMP NO. 24146 OF 2025 Vishnu Priya. R ..Petitioner(s) Vs. AvinashBabu ..Respondent(s) Prayer : This Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed under Section 151 of C.P.C. to withdraw F.C.O.P.No.230 of 2025 from the file of the Family Court at Chengalpet District and transfer the same to the Subordinate Court, Pondicherry. For Petitioner(s): M.Vidya For Respondent(s): M/s.R.Suryakumaran ORDER Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondent. 2. The respondent ( wife) in F.C.O.P.No.230 of 2025 on the file of the Family Court, Chengalpet is the petitioner herein. This petition is filed to transfer F.C.O.P.No.230 of 2024 on the file of the Family Court, Chengalpattu https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis TR CMP No. 1076 of 2025 __________ Page2 of 4 to Family Court, Pondicherry by stating that she finds it difficult to travel from Puducherry to.Chengalpattu for all the hearings with her two years old child. 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 two years old child at Puducherry and she finds it difficult to travel from Puducherry to Chengalpattu for all the hearing dates. 4. The learned counsel for the respondent does not have any serious objection in ordering 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:- “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 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis TR CMP No. 1076 of 2025 __________ Page3 of 4 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 F.C.O.P.No.230 of 2025, it appears that petitioner/husband is the resident of Chengalpet District (Chinna Natham) and the respondent/wife is resident of Puducherry. 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, F.C.O.P.No.230 of 2025 pending on the file of the Family Court, Chengalpattu is withdrawn and transferred to the file of the Family Court, Puducherry. The Family Court, Puducherry 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. 27-03-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No KKD https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis TR CMP No. 1076 of 2025 __________ Page4 of 4 R.KALAIMATHI, J. KKD TR CMP No.1076 of 2025 27-03-2026 (2/2) https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis