Madras High Court
Dhanalakshmi vs Vinoth on 11 January, 2023
Author: S.M.Subramaniam
Bench: S.M.Subramaniam
2023/MHC/154
Tr.CMP No.1210 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 11-01-2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
Tr.CMP No.1210 of 2022
And
CMP No.20779 of 2022
Dhanalakshmi .. Petitioner
vs.
Vinoth .. Respondent
PRAYER : This Transfer CMP is filed under Section 24 of the Civil
Procedure Code, to withdraw the case in HMOP No.243 of 2022 from the file
of the Principal Sub Court at Mayiladuthurai and transfer the same to the file
of the Family Court at Cuddalore.
For Petitioner : Mr.A.K.Velan
For Respondent : Mr.S.Jayaseelan
1/18
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Tr.CMP No.1210 of 2022
ORDER
The present Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed to withdraw the case in HMOP No.243 of 2022 from the file of the Principal Sub Court at Mayiladuthurai and transfer the same to the file of the Family Court at Cuddalore.
2. The marriage between the petitioner-wife and the respondent- husband was solemnised on 28.03.2019 as per Hindu Rites and Customs. One male child was born from and out of the wedlock between the petitioner. Due to misunderstanding between the petitioner and the respondent, they are now living separately and the child is with the custody of the petitioner-wife.
3. The respondent-husband filed HMOP No.243 of 2022 for dissolution of marriage on the file of the Principal Sub Court at Mayiladuthurai.
2/18 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Tr.CMP No.1210 of 2022
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner is unemployed and now residing with her parents at Cuddalore along with male child. Thus she is not in a position to travel all along from Cuddalore to Mayiladuthurai to contest the dissolution of marriage case filed by the respondent in HMOP No.243 of 2022, which is pending on the file of the Principal Sub Court at Mayiladuthurai.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner states that the respondent is not paying even the Interim Maintenance to safeguard his own child and now the petitioner is depending on her age-old parents even to feed her child. In such circumstances, the Courts are expected to step in and protect the livelihood of the minor child, which is the fundamental right ensured under the Constitution.
6. Whenever, the life of minor child is in question, the Courts are expected to protect the interest of the child and any non-protection in this regard would have larger societal repercussions and the High Court, being the 3/18 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Tr.CMP No.1210 of 2022 Constitutional Court, is expected to grant Interim Maintenance in such circumstances even in the absence of any formal application by any one of the parties. If the High Court fails to grant Interim Maintenance in such circumstances, where the minor child is to be maintained by an unemployed mother, then the High Court is failing in its duty to protect the life of the minor child under the Constitution of India.
7. The learned counsel for the respondent objected the said contention raised on behalf of the petitioner by stating that the respondent was previously working at Abu Dhabi and after Covid 19 pandemic situation, he lost his job and now he is residing with his parents at Mayiladuthurai.
8. This Court asked the learned counsel for the respondent to get instructions from the respondent-husband in respect of grant of Interim Maintenance only to the minor child. On instructions, the learned counsel for the respondent made a submission that he is ready and willing to pay Interim Maintenance of Rs.3,000/- to the child. On securing employment in future, 4/18 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Tr.CMP No.1210 of 2022 the respondent agrees to pay further maintenance to the child and in this regard, the petitioner is at liberty to file an appropriate application before the Competent Court for grant of maintenance based on the family status and the nature of employment etc.
9. Parents are duty bound to maintain their minor children. The male child has to be taken care of by the father, who is the natural guardian and an earning member. The petitioner-wife is unemployed and therefore, the respondent-father has to maintain the child.
10. For grant of Interim Maintenance to the minor children, no application is required. Even in the absence of any application, the Courts are bound to consider grant of Interim Maintenance in the interest of the minor children and to protect their livelihood, which is the Fundamental Right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
11. Remedy of maintenance is the measure of social justice as 5/18 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Tr.CMP No.1210 of 2022 envisaged under the Constitution to prevent the wife and the children from falling into destitution and vagrancy. Preamble and Article 39 and 15(3) of the Indian Constitution envisage social justice and positive State action for empowerment of women and children.
12. An order of Interim Maintenance is conditional on circumstance that the wife or husband, who makes a claim has no independent income sufficient for her or his support. It is no answer to a claim of maintenance that the wife is educated and could support herself. The Court may take into consideration the status of the parties and the capacity of the spouse to pay for her or his support. Maintenance is dependent upon factual situations; the Court should mould the claim for maintenance based on various factors brought before it. The courts have held that if the wife is earning, it cannot operate as a bar from being awarded maintenance by the husband. The obligation of the husband to provide maintenance stands on a higher pedestal than the wife.
6/18 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Tr.CMP No.1210 of 2022
13. Regarding maintenance for minor children, the living expenses of the child would include expenses for food, clothing, residence, medical expenses, education of children. Education expenses of the children must be normally borne by the father. If the wife is working and earning sufficiently, the expenses may be shared proportionately between the parties. Serious disability or ill-health of a spouse, child/children from the marriage/dependent relative who require constant care and recurrent expenditure, would also be a relevant consideration while quantifying maintenance.
14. Due to pressure on various aspects, the parties to the matrimonial disputes are not even filing any formal application for grant of Maintenance/Interim Maintenance even for the minor child/children. In such circumstances, it is the bounden duty of the Court to ensure that the interest of the minor child/children are protected by granting Interim Maintenance in the absence of any formal application during the pendency of the matrimonial disputes between the husband and the wife.
7/18 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Tr.CMP No.1210 of 2022
15. When the livelihood, lifestyle or education of the children are in question, then the Courts must act as a custodian of minor child/children and award Interim Maintenance to protect the interest of the minor children. In many cases unemployed mothers are maintaining their minor child/children, causing burden to the age-old parents and such circumstances must be seriously considered by the Courts. Grandparents are burdened with their minor children and the fathers of those minor children are the earning members and escaping from the clutches of their liability, which cannot be tolerated by the Courts. The responsibility of the father, being primary in nature, fathers are duty bound to maintain the minor child/ children, when there is a matrimonial disputes between the spouses. Denial of visitation right is not a ground to grant exemption from the payment of maintenance. Visitation right is to be decided based on other facts and circumstances, which is not connected with the grant of maintenance to the minor child/children.
8/18 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Tr.CMP No.1210 of 2022
16. In the present case, the transfer of the case is to be considered, since the petitioner is unemployed and taking care of minor male child and she is residing along with her parents at Cuddalore. That being the case, the divorce case filed by the respondent is to be transferred to the place, where the petitioner resides.
17. The principles regarding transfer petitions, more specifically in the matters of matrimonial cases, are well settled through the three decisions of the High Court of Madras, in the following cases:-
(i) The Hon'ble Division Bench of the High Court of Madras in W.A.No.1181 of 2009, dated 09.07.2010, wherein in paragraphs-21 and 22, it has been observed as under:-
''21. The domicile or citizenship of the opposite party is immaterial in a case like this. In case the marriage was solemnized under Hindu Law marital relationship is governed by the provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act. Therefore, Section 19 has 9/18 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Tr.CMP No.1210 of 2022 to be given a purposeful interpretation. It is the residence of the wife, which determines the question of jurisdiction, in case the proceeding was initiated at the instance of the wife.
22. While considering a provision like Section 19 (iii-a) of the Hindu Marriage Act, the objects and reasons which prompted the parliament to incorporate such a provision has also to be taken note of. Sub Clause (iii-a) was inserted in Section 19 with a specific purpose. Experience is the best teacher. The Government found the difficulties faced by women in the matter of initiation of matrimonial proceedings. The report submitted by the Law Commission as well as National Commission for Women, underlying the need for such amendment so as to enable the women to approach the nearest jurisdictional court to redress 10/18 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Tr.CMP No.1210 of 2022 their matrimonial grievances, were also taken note of by the Government. Therefore such a beneficial provision meant for the women of our Country should be given a meaningful interpretation by Courts.''
(ii) In yet another case in Tr.CMP.Nos.138 and 139 of 2006, dated 30.08.2006, the High Court of Madras has considered the following judgments of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India:-
''(1). In the case of Mona Aresh Goel vs. Aresh Satya Goel [(2000) 9 SCC 255], 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.
(2) In the case of Geeta Heera vs. Harish Chander Heera [(2000) 10 SCC 304], the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that where the petitioner's 11/18 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Tr.CMP No.1210 of 2022 wife has pleaded lack of money, the same has to be considered.
(3) In the case of Lalita A.Ranga vs. Ajay Champalal Ranga [(2000) 9 SCC 355], the wife has filed a petition to transfer the proceedings initiated by the husband for divorce, at Bombay. The place of residence of the wife was at Jaipur, Rajasthan. In that case, the petitioner is having a small child and that she pleaded difficulty in going all the way from Jaipur to Bombay to contest the proceedings from time to time. Considering the distance and the difficulties faced by the wife, the Supreme Court has allowed the transfer petition.
(4) In a decision in Archana Singh vs. Surendra Bahadur Singh [(2005) 12 SCC 395], the wife has sought for transfer of matrimonial proceedings and a divorce petition has been filed by 12/18 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Tr.CMP No.1210 of 2022 the respondent's husband at Baikunthpur to be transferred to Allahabad, where the petitioner's wife was residing, on the ground that it would be difficult for her to undertake such long distance journey, particularly in circumstances, in which she finds that the proceedings under Section 125 Cr.P.C. was already pending before the Family Court, Allahabad.
Considering the difficulties faced by the wife and also the long distance journey, the Honourable Supreme Court was pleased to order transfer of the proceedings to Allahabad.”
(iii) In a decision made in TR.CMP(MD)No.108 of 2010, dated 03.03.2011, the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, wherein in paragraph- 18, it has been observed as below:-
''18. It is true that section 19 of the Hindu Marriage Act, has been amended by insertion of proviso of (iii)(a) to section 19. Of Course, this 13/18 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Tr.CMP No.1210 of 2022 amended section 19(iii)(a) gives special preference to the wife to file a petition or defending the case of the husband before the Court within whose jurisdiction she resides. The intention of the Legislator is to safe- guard the interest and rights of the women, who are being subjected to harassment and cruelty. But this special preference conferred under section 19(iii)(a) of the Hindu Marriage Act shall not be used to wreck vengeance on the husband. There must be a justifiable cause to select the jurisdiction of the Court where she resides.''
18. It is needless to state that the petitioner is at liberty to file an appropriate maintenance petition claiming maintenance for herself and to the child and the final maintenance amount is to be determined after adjudication by the Competent Court. However, the Interim Maintenance is to be granted to protect and to meet out the basic needs of the minor child and any delay in 14/18 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Tr.CMP No.1210 of 2022 this regard would affect the very livelihood of the minor child.
19. As far as the present Tr.CMP is concerned, the the petitioner is unemployed and is taking care of minor child and depending on her age-old parents.
20. That being the factum, this Court is inclined to pass the following orders:
(1) HMOP No.243 of 2022 pending on the file of the Principal Sub Court at Mayiladuthurai stands transferred to the file of the Family Court at Cuddalore forthwith.
(2) The Principal Sub Court at Mayiladuthurai is directed to transmit the case papers to the Family Court at Cuddalore, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
(3) The respondent-husband is directed to pay the Interim Maintenance of Rs.3,000/- (Rupees Three Thousand only) to the petitioner to maintain minor male child from January 2023 onwards. 15/18
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Tr.CMP No.1210 of 2022 (4) The Interim Maintenance of a sum of Rs.3,000/- (Rupees Three Thousand) is to be paid on or before 10th day of every calendar month to the Bank Account of the petitioner-mother and the learned counsel for the petitioner undertakes that the Bank Account Number along with the details will be provided to the learned counsel for the respondent for informing the same to the respondent within a period of one week from today. The mode of payment of Interim Maintenance by the respondent can either by way of money transfer directly to the Bank Account of the petitioner or by way of sending Demand Draft drawn in the name of the petitioner.
(5) In the event of any failure on the part of the respondent in paying the Interim Maintenance to the minor male child, the petitioner is at liberty to move the contempt petition before this Court.
(6) The Interim Maintenance granted in the present Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is not a bar for the petitioner to claim further maintenance in accordance with law.
(7) The HMOP No.243 of 2022 may be disposed of as expeditiously as possible.
16/18 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Tr.CMP No.1210 of 2022
21. With the abovesaid directions, the Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition stands allowed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
11-01-2023 Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order.
Neutral Citation : Yes/No. Internet : Yes/No. Index: Yes/No. Svn S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.
Svn To
1.The Principal Sub Judge, Principal Sub Court, Mayiladuthurai.
17/18 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Tr.CMP No.1210 of 2022
2.The Judge, Family Court, Cuddalore.
Tr.CMP No.1210 of 2022
11-01-2023 18/18 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis