IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Dated: 30.09.2008 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S. RAJESWARAN Tr.C.M.P.No.208 of 2008 and M.P.No.1 of 2008 Ranjani .. Petitioner Vs. P.Vinayagamoorthi .. Respondent This transfer Civil Miscellaneous petition is filed under Section 24 of C.P.C. to transfer the H.M.O.P.No.225 of 2007 filed by the respondent/husband, from the file of the Subordinate Judge, Namakkal to the file of the Subordinate Judge, Sankari For Petitioner : Mr.D.Sivakumaran For Respondent : No appearance O R D E R The respondent/wife in H.M.O.P. No.225 of 2007 is the petitioner herein. H.M.O.P.No.225 of 2007 has been filed by the respondent herein/husband for restitution of conjugal rights before the Subordinate Judge, Namakkal. 2. The case of the petitioner herein is that the petitioner/wife is residing with her parents in Sankari town where she has filed a petition in M.C.No.14 of 2005 for maintenance before the Judicial Magistrate, Sankari. It is also stated by the petitioner/wife that the respondent/husband is appearing before the Judicial Magistrate, Sankari in that case. Further, the petitioner/wife is aged about 22 years and she is also having no income of her own and she is depending on her parents. Hence, it has become difficult for her to travel from Sankari to Namakkal to defend the case filed by the husband. Hence, she has filed the above transfer petition for the aforesaid relief. 3. Notice was ordered by this court on 16.06.2008 and interim stay was granted. Though the respondent/ husband has been served and his name appeared in the list, there is no representation either in person or through counsel on behalf of the respondent/husband. 4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner/wife https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ and I have also gone through the documents filed in support of the petition. 5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that despite service of notice, there is no representation by the respondent, I am inclined to consider this petition in favour of the petitioner/wife. On a perusal of the affidavit filed in support of the petition, I am satisfied that she has made out a case for transfer. 6. Accordingly, the transfer Civil Miscellaneous petition is allowed and I direct the withdrawal of H.M.O.P.No.225 of 2007 from the file of the Subordinate Judge, Namakkal to be transferred to the file of Subordinate Judge, Sankari. 7. In the result, the transfer petition is allowed. No costs. Connected miscellaneous petition is also closed. Sd/- Asst.Registrar /True Copy/ Sub.Asst.Registrar vaan To 1. The Subordinate Judge, Namakkal. 2. The Subordinate Judge, Sankari 1 cc to Mr.D.Shivakumaran, Advocate, Sr.No.56504 Tr.C.M.P.No.208 of 2008 and M.P.No.1 of 2008 SJ(CO) EM/20.11. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/