M KEERTHANADEVI Vs. P T THANESHWARAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner/wife filed the transfer petition to transfer the case in H.M.O.P.No.117 of 2009 filed by the respondent/husband on the file of the Subordinate Court, Karur, to the Family Court, Coimbatore, to be tried along with H.M.O.P.No.98 of 2010, filed by her for restitution of conjugal rights.

(2.) IT is stated by the petitioner/wife that she is having a twins aged three years and she finds it difficult to attend the Court at Karur, and she also filed petition in H.M.O.P.No.98 of 2010, for restitution of conjugal rights. Therefore, both the cases may be tried by the Family Court, Coimbatore.

(3.) IT is submitted that the respondent/husband filed the petition in H.M.O.P.No.117 of 2010, on the file of the Subordinate Court, Karur, and thereafter only the petitioner/wife filed the petition in H.M.O.P.No.98 of 2010. Therefore, as per Section 21(A) of the said Act, the latter case has to be transferred to the Court where the former case is pending. Though, Section 21(A) of the said Act, says that only when the petitions are filed under Section 10 and 13 of the said Act, the latter case should be transferred to the Court, where the former case is pending, in my opinion the principle laid down in Section 21(A) of the said Act, can be invoked in all matrimonial proceedings, irrespective of the grounds on which the petitions were filed and therefore, when one party filed a petition for restitution of conjugal rights and another party filed a petition seeking for divorce, Section 21 (A) of the said Act can be invoked to transfer the latter case where the former case is pending.