IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 14TH MARCH 2008 / 24TH PHALGUNA 1929 Tr.P(C).No. 18 of 2008() ------------------------ OP.1501/2007 of FAMILY COURT,ERNAKULAM .................... PETITIONER/RESPONDENT: ------------------------------- SARITHA P.K. D/O.KORAN, AGED 36 YEARS,RESIDING AT ADIYERIPARAMBU HOUSE,K.R.H.NO.143,KANNUR. BY ADV. SRI.A.MOHAMED MUSTAQUE SRI.M.K.SUMOD SRI.KAUSER EDAPPAGATH SRI.K.R.AVINASH (KUNNATH) SRI.V.G.SALEESH RESPONDENT: PETITIONER ----------------------- K.S.SUJAN,S/O.SREEDHARAN AGED 43 YEARS,KOLLENPARAMBIL HOUSE PERUMPADAPPU, PALLURUTHI, COCHIN 682 005. THIS TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER ON I.A.No.104/08 IN TR.P.(C) 18/08 //DISMISSED// 14.3.08 SD/- (M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE) M.N.KRISHNAN, J. -------------------------- Tr.P. C NO. 18 OF 2008 --------------------- Dated this the 14th day of March, 2008 ORDER This transfer petition is filed with a prayer to transfer OP 1501/07 on the file of the Family Court, Ernakulam, to the Family Court, Kannur, where OP 798/07 and MC 3/08 are pending. 2. The transfer petitioner is the wife. The said OP is filed by the respondent for restitution of conjugal rights. The application was filed in November,2007. In December, 2007 the wife has filed two applications, one for divorce and the other for maintenance. Now the petitioner requests this court to transfer OP 1501/07 on the file of the Family Court, Ernakulam, to the Family Court, Kannur, for trial along with OP 798/07 and MC 3/08. 3. Learned counsel for the transfer petitioner very vehemently contends that the transfer petitioner is not having financial capacity to travel on each and every occasion from Kannur to Ernakulam to prosecute the case. Being a lady she cannot travel alone and that her parents are aged and therefore it will be extremely difficult for her to attend the proceedings at Family Court, Ernakulam. Respondent TPC NO.18/08 2 is served. The averments in the petition remain uncontroverted. In these types of cases the court has to consider the comparative hardship. Being a lady, certainly the comparative hardship is more on women than men with respect to travel for the reason that women always require the assistance of some elder members that too for attending the case before the Family Court. It is alleged that since the husband has neglected to maintain her, she was forced to file a maintenance, which shows about the financial limitation as well. So I find the comparative hardship is more on the petitioner/wife. Therefore, OP 1501/07 pending before the Family Court, Ernakulam, is transferred to the Family Court, Kannur, to be tried along with OP 798/07 and MC 3/08. I also direct the Family Court, Kannur not to insist the presence of the husband on each and every occasion unless it is strictly necessary, in order to avoid his inconvenience. The transfer petition is disposed of accordingly. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE vps TPC NO.18/08 3