IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH TUESDAY, THE 13TH JULY 2010 / 22ND ASHADHA 1932 Tr.P(C).No. 206 of 2010() ------------------------- OP.990/2010 of FAMILY COURT,ERNAKULAM .................... PETITIONER ------------------------------ LATHESH.K.P,S/O.BALAN AGED 30 YEARS, KUNNATHUPARAMBATHU,CHEEKKALETTU PO,ATHOLI VIA, KOZHIKODE 673 315. BY ADV. SRI.K.M.FIROZ RESPONDENT: --------------- ASA.K, D/O.HARIDASAN KIDAV,AGED 23 YEARS KARUNA,KINALUR POST, KOZHIKODE 673 621. THIS TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P JOSEPH, J. ---------------------------------------- Tr.P.(C).No.206 of 2010 --------------------------------------- Dated this 13th day of July, 2010 ORDER This petition is filed by the husband for transfer of O.P.No.990 of 2010 from Family Court, Ernakulam to Family Court, Kozhikode. That is a petition filed by respondent/wife seeking divorce under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act. Contention of petitioner is that in the original petition in O.P.No.990 of 2010 respondent has given a make belief address of temporary stay, petitioner is actually a permanent resident of Kozhikode and hence Family Court, Ernakulam has no jurisdiction to entertain the petition. Hence, invoking the Section 24(5) of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short, “the Code”) request is made to transfer the case from Family Court, Ernakulam to Kozhikode. Learned counsel for petitioner contends that this is a case where merely for conferring jurisdiction on the Family Court, Ernakulam, an address where petitioner was temporarily staying has been given. Learned counsel also reminds this court of its power to transfer the case from the court having no jurisdiction invoking Section 24(5) of the Code. 2. True, power is conferred under Section 24(5) of the Tr.P.(C).No.206 of 2010 : 2 : Code. Question is whether this court should go into the question of lack of jurisdiction at the first instance wherever it is raised and particularly when petitioner has an opportunity to raise such a contention before the court concerned and invite a decision on the point. Even invoking power under Section 24(5) of the Code no interference in the matter of jurisdiction is required when it is disputed question of fact and in respect of which the parties have the right to adduce evidence. 3. As such, I am not inclined to entertain this petition. It is open to the petitioner to raise all his contentions including lack of jurisdiction before the court concerned. Writ petition is dismissed. (THOMAS P JOSEPH, JUDGE) Sbna/-