B. Kavya vs M.Sakthi Ramaraj
- Court
- Madras High Court
TR CMP(MD) No. 385 of 2026
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
Reserved on : 13.10.2026
Pronounced on : 11.11.2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.VADAMALAI
TR CMP(MD) No. 385 of 2026
CNR:{HCMD010981642026}
AND
CMP(MD) No. 10004 of 2026
B.Kavya,
D/o. Boopathi,
Shree Amman Associates,
Amman Nagar,
Veerapandi,
Theni District – 625 534. ...Petitioner
Vs.
M.Sakthi Ramaraj,
S/o. Meenatchi Sundaram,
No.1-68/8, North 1st Cross Street,
A1 Ameen Nagar,
S.Kodikulam, K.Pudur,
Madurai – 625 007. ...Respondent
PRAYER: This Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed under
Section 24 of Civil Procedure Code to withdraw the case in
H.M.O.P.No.1683 of 2025 on the file of the Family Court, Madurai and
transfer the same to the Family Court, Theni.
For Petitioner :Mr.Niranjan S. Kumar
For Respondent :Mr.S.Elango
__________
Page 1 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 11/11/2026 05:46:58 pm )
TR CMP(MD) No. 385 of 2026
ORDER
This Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed seeking for an
order to withdraw H.M.O.P.No.1683 of 2025 from the file of the Family
Court, Madurai and to transfer the same to the file of the Family Court,
Theni.
2. The petitioner and the respondent are spouses. Their marriage
was solemnized on 11.03.2016 at Veerapandi of Theni District according
to the Hindu rites and customs. Out of wedlock, they have been blessed
with a male child. Upon a misunderstanding arose between them they are
living separately. The petitioner is now residing along with her parents at
Theni. Thereafter, the respondent filed a petition in H.M.O.P. No.1683 of
2025 before the Family Court, Madurai, against the petitioner for
restitution of conjugal rights and the same is pending. At this stage, the
petitioner has moved this transfer petition before this Court.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the
marriage between the petitioner and the respondent was solemnized on
11.03.2016 and out of wedlock, she gave birth to a male child on
12.04.2017, named Rakshan. Due to a misunderstanding, the petitioner,
__________
Page 2 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 11/11/2026 05:46:58 pm )
TR CMP(MD) No. 385 of 2026
along with her minor son, is now residing with her parents at Theni.
Her son is aged 9 years and is studying in 4th Standard in Velammal
Vidyalaya, Theni. The petitioner has produced a copy of the aadhaar
card and school Identity Card of her son to prove her residence and her
son’s schooling at Theni. The petitioner has no independent source of
income, and she is solely depending on her parents. The respondent filed
the petition for restitution of conjugal rights in H.M.O.P.No.1683 of 2025
before the Family Court, Madurai. The petitioner finds it difficult to
travel from Theni to Madurai for attending the case. In the above
circumstances, the petitioner has filed this present Transfer Civil
Miscellaneous Petition. Hence, the petition may be allowed. In support of
his submissions, the learned counsel has relied on the ruling of the
Hon’ble Supreme Court reported in 2022 Live Law (SC) 627 in the case
of N.C.V.Aishwarya /v/ A.S.Saravana Karthik Sha.
4. The learned counsel for the respondent has filed a counter and
strongly objected to the petition. The learned counsel further submitted
that the respondent is working in Chennai and has arranged a rental house
in Madipakkam. The petitioner is none other than the respondent's
maternal uncle’s daughter. After marriage, they have been living in
Chennai and their son is studying at Velammal School, Madipakkam, and
__________
Page 3 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 11/11/2026 05:46:58 pm )
TR CMP(MD) No. 385 of 2026
the respondent has paid the entire school fee. The petitioner voluntarily
left the matrimonial home without any intimation, and the petitioner’s
father used to threaten the respondent and his parents. So, the respondent
has filed the petition for restitution of conjugal rights before the Family
Court, Madurai. The Family Court, Madurai has permitted for appearance
through Video Conferencing, so the petitioner need not personally attend
the Court for each and every hearing. The petitioner is having sufficient
means. The respondent is working in Chennai at an IT company;
therefore the respondent has submitted that the main case may be
transferred to the Sub Court, Usilampatti.
5. In reply, the learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that
there is no threat from the petitioner's side, as alleged by the respondent.
The respondent has not lodged any police complaint regarding the said
alleged threat.
6. The submissions of both sides were considered. There is no
dispute that the marriage between the petitioner and the respondent has
been solemnized as per Hindu religious rites and customs and out of
wedlock they have been blessed with a male child, Rakshan, who is now
studying in Velammal Vidyalaya, Theni, as seen from the photocopy of
__________
Page 4 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 11/11/2026 05:46:58 pm )
TR CMP(MD) No. 385 of 2026
his school ID. The respondent has not produced any material to show that
their son is studying in Chennai.
7. It is clear that, due to a misunderstanding arose between the
parties, they are living separately, and the petitioner is now residing at
Theni along with her parents. Her son is also staying with them.
This was not specifically denied by the respondent. It is a well settled
proposition of law by a number of decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme
Court, that whenever a transfer petition is filed in matrimonial disputes,
the convenience of the wife should be predominantly looked into and the
wife’s convenience shall be given preference. The respondent submits
that since he is working in an IT company, the case may be transferred to
the Sub Court, Usilampatti. By transferring, the matter to a middle place
will not serve any purpose to both parties.
8. Therefore, taking note of the settled position of the convenience
of the wife in matrimonial cases and submissions of both sides and also
considering the fact that the respondent is working in an IT company,
Chennai, this Court is of the view that the present petition filed by the
wife is to be partly allowed and this Court is inclined to transfer the
H.M.O.P.No.1683 of 2025 on the file of the Family Court, Madurai to the
__________
Page 5 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 11/11/2026 05:46:58 pm )
TR CMP(MD) No. 385 of 2026
Sub Court, Theni instead of Family Court, Theni since the personal
appearance of parties before the Sub Court will not be insisted as required
in Family Court and by such transfer both parties will not be prejudiced.
9. In the result, this Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is partly
allowed. The petition in H.M.O.P.No.1683 of 2025 on the file of the
Family Court, Madurai, is hereby withdrawn and transferred to the file of
the Sub Court, Theni, for disposal in accordance with law. The learned
Judge of the Family Court, Madurai is directed to transmit the entire
records pertaining to the case in H.M.O.P.No.1683 of 2025 to the
transferee Court, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of
a copy of this order. No costs. Consequently, the connected Civil
Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
11.11.2026
Index: Yes/No
Speaking/Non-speaking order
Neutral Citation: Yes/No
VSD
__________
Page 6 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 11/11/2026 05:46:58 pm )
TR CMP(MD) No. 385 of 2026
To
1.The Family Court,
Madurai.
2.The Principal Sub Court,
Theni.
3.The Section Officer,
Vernacular Section,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
__________
Page 7 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 11/11/2026 05:46:58 pm )
TR CMP(MD) No. 385 of 2026
P.VADAMALAI, J.
VSD
Pre - Delivery Order made in
TR CMP(MD) No. 385 of 2026
AND
CMP(MD) No. 10004 of 2026
11.11.2026
__________
Page 8 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
( Uploaded on: 11/11/2026 05:46:58 pm )