IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH WEDNESDAY, THE 27TH JULY 2011 / 5TH SRAVANA 1933 Tr.P(C).No. 219 of 2010() ----------------------------------- OS.364/2009 of SUB COURT, MAVELIKKARA. .................... PETITIONERS/DEFENDANTS IN OS NO.215 OF 2008 & PLAINTIFF IN OS.364 OF 2009 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. A. RAMACHANDRAN PILLAI, SONOF LATE ACHUTHAN NAIR, AGED 56, MAROTTIKULATHU HOUSE, EZHUMATTOOR MURI AND VILLAGE MALLAPPALLY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 2. SUSAMMA, WIFE OF A. RAMACHANDRAN PILLAI, AGED 47, MAROTTIKULATHU HOUSE, EZHUMATTOOR MURI AND VILLAGE, MALLAPPALLY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 3. SIVARAJ, S/O.A. RAMACHANDRAN PILLAI, AGED 22, MAROTTIKULATHU HOUSE, EZHUMATTOOR MURI AND VILLAGE, MALLAPPALLY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.T.RAMPRASAD UNNI, SMT.SMITHA GEORGE. RESPONDENTS/DEFENDATNS IN OS.364 OF 2009 & PLAINTIFF IN OS.215 OF 2008. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. BHARATHY AMMA, AGED 81, JAYA NIVAS, PALLICKAL MURI, KATTANAM VILLAGE, MAVELIKKARA TALUK, REPRESENTED BY HER DAUGHTER INDIRA AMMA, JAYA NIVAS, PALLICKAL MURI, KATTANAM VILLAGE, MAVELIKKARA TALUK-690 101. 2. INDIRA AMMA, WIFE OF LATE GOPALAKRISHNA PILLAI, AGED 59, JAYA NIVAS, PALLICKAL MURI, KATTANAM VILLAGE, MAVELIKKARA TALUK, 690 101. 3. VIJAYALAKSHMI, D/O.INDIRA AMMA, AGED 38, CHETHANA HOUSE, SOORANAD MURI & VILLAGE, 690 101. R1 TO R3 BY ADV. SRI.P.B.SAHASRANAMAN, SRI.T.S.HARIKUMAR, SRI.K.JAGADEESH. THIS TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: rs THOMAS P.JOSEPH, J. ==================================== Tr.P(C) No.219 of 2010 ==================================== Dated this the 27th day of July, 2011 O R D E R This petition is for transfer of O.S. No.364 of 2009 from Sub Court, Mavelikkara to the Sub Court, Thiruvalla for trial along with O.S. No.215 of 2008 pending in that court. 2. I have heard learned Senior Advocate and learned counsel for respondents. Learned Senior Advocate pointed out that if the suit pending in the Sub Court, Mavelikkara is transferred to the Sub Court, Thiruvalla it will be convenient for all the parties. It is also pointed out that one of the parties in O.S. No.215 of 2008 is also a party in O.S. No.364 of 2009 as well. 3. Request for transfer is resisted by the respondents. It is pointed out that there is no connection between the two suits, parties are different, properties are different, documents of title on which parties claim title are different and that reliefs are also different. In such circumstances no question of joint trial of the suits is involved. In that view of the matter the request for transfer is liable to the rejected, it is argued. 4. As learned counsel submitted before me the properties Tr.P(C) No.219 of 2010 -: 2 :- involved are different, parties claim title under different documents of title and reliefs prayed for in the suits are also different. In such a situation no question of joint trial is involved. Normally suits relating to immovable properties are to be tried in the court within the local limits of which such property is situate. Admittedly the properties involved in these suits are situate in the local limits of separate courts. In the circumstances I do not find reason to order a joint trial of the suits. In that situation for the mere reason that one of the parties in O.S. No.215 of 2008 is also a party in the other suit the request for transfer cannot be allowed. Petition fails and is dismissed. THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE. vsv