K MEENAMBIGAI Vs. POOVANANDAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner/wife has filed this Tr.C.M.P. under Section 24 of Civil Procedure Code before this Court praying for an order to withdraw the H.M.O.P.No.6 of 2006 pending on the file of Sub Court, Tenkasi and to transfer the same to the file of 1st Additional Family Court at Chennai and to be heard along with M.C.No.583 of 2007.

(2.) THE petitioner/wife in her affidavit has stated that her marriage with the respondent/husband has been solemnized on 07.09.1990 at Oormelalagiyan village, Tenkasi Taluk as per Hindu Rites and Customs in the presence of elders of both the families and out of the wed lock they have two issues and that the respondent/ husband has come to the matrimonial home in April 2005 after consuming liquor and beat the petitioner demanding a dowry of Rs.2,00,000/- and further that the respondent/husband beat the petitioner/wife on 16.05.2005 at 11.00 p.m. and that an oral complaint has been given by the petitioner before the Panchayatdars and later, in 1998 the respondent/husband brought the petitioner and her child for medical check up in regard to venial decease because the respondent/husband has not been confident enough on his own self and later the petitioner has come to know that the respondent has illicit conduct with some ladies and used to come to the residence in drunken state etc.

(3.) THE contention of the respondent/husband is that the petitioner/wife has not shown any interest to conduct the H.M.O.P.No.6 of 2006 filed by him and by suppressing the earlier proceedings the petitioner/wife without any proof to establish the jurisdiction has filed M.C.No.583 of 2007 before the 1st Additional Family Court, Chennai and the first hearing has been posted on 28.12.2007 and in the month of October 2007 itself the petitioner/wife has filed the transfer CMP before this Court praying to transfer the H.M.O.P.No.6 of 2006 and that the petitioner/wife has taken his younger second son without intimating him and to the earlier school and admitted in a school at Saligramam and that the petitioner/wife has started beauty parlour business in Saligramam with her friend and the same has been looked after by his wife's close friend who is now residing in Saligramam, Chennai and that the petitioner's gas bill is false and has been created for the purpose of filing the maintenance case etc. It is also the stand of the respondent/husband that the petitioner/wife has never shown her appearance before the 1st Additional Family Court at Chennai during the hearing dates on 11.4.2008, 11.06.2008, 05.08.2008 and 03.11.2008 in maintenance case No.583 of 2007 and that the parents of the petitioner/wife are not residing in Chennai and still they are residing in Sankarankoil and therefore, the transfer CMP is bereft of facts and the allegations are false.