IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH THURSDAY, THE 15TH JULY 2010 / 24TH ASHADHA 1932 TR.P(C).NO. 218 OF 2010() -------------------------------------- OPGW.660/2010 OF FAMILY COURT, KOTTAYAM .................... PETITIONERS/RESPONDENT ------------------------------------------ SURESH,S/O.KESAVAN,PARAYILPURAYIDATHIL HOUSE,SWARAJ KARA,AYYAPPANCOIL VILLAGE, IDUKKI DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.DILIP J. AKKARA RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER --------------------------------------------- SAUMYA,D/O.RAJAN,MANCHIRACKAL HOUSE, KARINILAM.P.O,PULLIKKUNNU KARA,ERUMELI VILLAGE, KANJIRAPPALLY TALUK,KOTTAYAM. THIS TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P.JOSEPH, J. ==================================== Tr.P(C) No.218 of 2010 ==================================== Dated this the 15th day of July, 2010 O R D E R This petition is for transfer of O.P(G&W) No.660 of 2010 from Family Court, Ettumanoor to Family Court, Thodupuzha. That petition is filed by respondent-wife seeking custody of child. Petitioner has filed O.P(HM) No.113 of 2010 and O.P(G&W) NO.113 of 2010 in the Family Court, Thodupuzha. According the petitioner Family Court, Ettumanoor has passed Annexure-IV order directing production of the child in that court on 28.6.2010 at 11.00 a.m. Petitioner apprehends trouble if he produces the child in that court. 2. The Supreme Court in Sumitha Singh v. Kumar Sanjay and another (AIR 2002 SC 396) and Arti Rani v. Dharmendra Kumar Gupta ([2008] 9 SCC 353) has stated that while considering request for transfer of matrimonial proceedings convenience of the wife has to be looked into. However I agree with the contention of petitioner that it does not mean that inconvenience of husband need not be looked into. On Tr.P(C) No.218 of 2010 -: 2 :- going through the petition and Annexures I am persuaded to think that transfer of the case from Family Court, Ettumanoor to Family Court, Thodupuzha will cause inconvenience to the respondent-wife. It is not disputed that petitioner is residing in Ayyappancoil Village, in Idukki District while respondent belongs to Erumeli Village in Kottayam District. Transfer of case will be a matter of inconvenience to her. In the circumstances I am not inclined to entertain this petition. Resultantly, this petition is dismissed. THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE. vsv