IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH FRIDAY, THE 11TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 20TH KARTHIKA 1933 Tr.P(C).No. 344 of 2011 ------------------------------ OP.No. 585/2011 OF FAMILY COURT,KOZHIKODE TO FAMILY COURT, THRISSUR ......................................................................................................................................................... PETITIONER : --------------------- R.SANGEETHA, AGED 34, D/O. G.RADHAKRISHNAN, HOUSE NO.183, K.K.PADOOR, P.V.KRISHNA PILLAI STREET, COIMBATORE-38, TAMIL NADU, NOW RESIDING AT 27 BALAJI NAGAR, OPP: P & T COLONY, P.O.COUNDER PALAYAM, COIMBATORE, TAMILNADU-641 030. BY ADVS. SRI.THIYYANNOOR RAMAKRISHNAN SRI.ARUN KUMAR.P SRI.AMBIKA RADHAKRISHNAN RESPONDENT : ----------------------- K.C.KRISHNANUNNI MENON, AGED 42, S/O. K.S.MENON, RESIDING AT A.3(S.I.), ANUGRAHA APARTMENTS, KATTUKULANGARA, POTTAMMAL, P.O.NELLIKODE, NELLIKODE AMSOM & DESOM, KOZHIKODE - 673 016. ADV. SRI.V.M.KRISHNAKUMAR THIS TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: DSV/- Tr.P(C).No. 344 of 2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT P1 : COPY OF THE PETITION FOR DIVORCE FILED BY THE RESPONDENT BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, KOZHIKODE IN O.P.NO.585/2011 DATED 26.07.2011. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: EXT R1(A) : COPY OF THE ORDER IN O.P.NO.712/2009 DATED 22.03.2010 OF FAMILY COURT KOZHIKKODE. EXT R1(B) : COPY OF THE ORDER IN O.P.NO.71/2011 DATED 04.07.2011 OF THE FAMILY COURT KOZHIKKODE. /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE DSV/- THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. ---------------------------------------- Tr.P(C).No.344 of 2011 --------------------------------------- Dated this 11th day of November, 2011 ORDER This petition is filed by the wife seeking transfer of O.P.No.585 of 2011 from the Family Court, Kozhikode to the Family Court, Thrissur. That is a petition filed by the respondent/husband for divorce. Petitioner states that she is presently staying at Coimbatore with her parents, she is a teacher working there and that her son is studying in the 5th standard at Coimbatore. Since her father is aged, there is nobody to accompany her to the Family Court, Kozhikode to contest O.P.No.585 of 2011. According to the petitioner, she has to travel for about 5 hrs from her place of residence to reach Kozhikode. Since her maternal home is at Guruvayoor, transfer of the case to Thrissur will be convenient to her and would reduce her hardship. 2. Petition is opposed by the respondent. It is contended that respondent is a business man at Kozhikode and that in O.P.No.585 of 2011, he intends to examine witnesses in and around Kozhikode. It is difficult to take those witnesses to Thrissur if the case is transferred to that place. It is also stated Tr.P(C).No.344 of 2011 -: 2 :- that respondent has filed O.P.No.71 of 2011 in the Family Court, Kozhikode for a declaration that certain property purchased by him in the name of petitioner belonged to her and in that case an ex parte decree was passed. The further contention respondent has raised is that he has filed O.P.No.712 of 2009 before the Family Court, Kozhikode seeking custody of the child. According to the respondent, interim order was passed in that case which is under challenge in appeal in this Court. There is no ground for transfer of the case, it is contended. In reply, learned counsel for petitioner contends that O.P.No.71 of 2011 happened to be decided ex parte on account of inconvenience of petitioner to travel from her place of residence to Kozhikode. As regards O.P.No.712 of 2009, stand of petitioner is that the said proceeding is already disposed of by the Family Court which is pending consideration in appeal in this Court. Respondent has produced the order in O.P.No.712 of 2009 as Annexure-R1(a) which appears to me as an order disposing of O.P.No.712 of 2009 though certain directions are issued to the petitioner in the matter of production of the child in the Family Court, Kozhikode. That order is under challenge in appeal in this Court. Tr.P(C).No.344 of 2011 -: 3 :- 3. The Supreme Court in Sumitha Singh Vs. Sanjay Kumar & Another (AIR 2002 SC 396) and Arti Rani Lrs. Pinki Devi and Another Vs. Darmendra Kumar Gupta (2008 (9) SCC 353) has stated that while considering the request for transfer of matrimonial proceedings, convenience of the wife has to be looked into. In the present case, petitioner claims to be staying at Coimbatore along with her parents (though it is disputed by the respondent). It is stated that petitioner is working as a teacher at that place and that his son is studying in 5th standard in the same place. I do not find reason to disbelieve that version of the petitioner, also for the reason that in O.P.No.585 of 2011 the present stay of petitioner is shown as at Counder Palayam, Coimbatore. Petitioner has to travel long distance from Coimbatore to Kozhikode. 4. As stated by the petitioner, her maternal home is at Guruvayoor and hence it will be convenient if the case is transferred to the Family Court, Thrissur. Viewed in the above circumstance I am not inclined to think, because the respondent may have to take some of his witnesses to Thrissur that request of petitioner has to be rejected. I am inclined to think that comparative hardship is more on petitioner if the request is not Tr.P(C).No.344 of 2011 -: 4 :- allowed. Hence I am inclined to allow the petition. Resultantly this petition is allowed as follows: (i) O.P.No.585 of 2011 pending in the Family Court, Kozhikode is withdrawn from that court and made over to the Family Court, Thrissur. (ii) The transferor court shall transmit records of the case to the transferee court with due intimation to the counsel on both sides as to the date of appearance in the transferee court. (iii) It is made clear that except when the physical presence of parties is necessary, it is open to them to appear through counsel in the transferee court. (THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE) Sbna/-