IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH TUESDAY, THE 2ND AUGUST 2011 / 11TH SRAVANA 1933 TR.P(C).NO. 196 OF 2011() ------------------------------------- TO TRANSFER O.P. NO.82 OF 2011, FAMILY COURT, WAYANAD TO FAMILY COURT,ERNAKULAM .................... PETITIONER: ------------------- MERLINE MARY GEORGE, D/O.GEORGE JOSEPH, AGED 26 YEARS, 312-B1, CHULLIKKAL HOUSE, MANIMALA ROAD, EDAPPALLY P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.T.G.RAJENDRAN RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- BIJU. M.RAJAN, S/O.RAJAN, AGED 34, MOOLEPPARAMBIL HOUSE, EDAVAKA P.O., MANANTHAVADY TALUK, WYNAD, WORKING IN INDUS MOTORS, OPP: COCHIN SHIPYARD, M.G.ROAD, THEVARA, ERNAKULAM. THIS TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P.JOSEPH, J. ==================================== Tr.P(C) No.196 of 2011 ==================================== Dated this the 02nd day of August, 2011 O R D E R Respondent though served, remains absent. 2. This petition is filed by the wife seeking transfer of O.P. No.82 of 2011 from Family Court, Wayanad to Family Court, Ernakulam to facilitate joint trial of that case along with O.P(Div.) No.1190 of 2011 pending in the latter court. Respondent filed O.P. No.82 of 2011 in Family Court, Wayanad for restitution of conjugal rights while petitioner filed O.P(Div.) No.1190 of 2011 in Family Court, Ernakulam for dissolution of marriage. It is stated that petitioner, aged about 26 years is residing at Chullikkal, Edappally and that she finds it difficult to travel all the distance from her place of residence to Wayanad to contest the case. 3. 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. That of course does not mean that the inconvenience of the husband Tr.P(C) No.196 of 2011 -: 2 :- has to be ignored. Petitioner-wife aged 26 years is residing near Edappally in Ernakulam and respondent who belongs to Edavaka in Mananthavady Taluk is reported to be working in Indus Motors at Thevara, Ernakulam. If he is working at that place transfer of the case to Family Court, Ernakulam will be convenient to him also. Moreover O.P. No.1190 of 2011 Is pending in Family Court, Ernakulam and it is necessary that these cases are tried and disposed of by the same court. Having regard to the circumstances stated I am inclined to think that the hardship is comparatively more on petitioner if the request is not allowed. The inconvenience that may be caused to the respondent can be reduced by permitting him to appear in the transferee court through counsel except when his physical presence is required. Hence I am inclined to allow the petition. Resultantly, the Petition is allowed as follows: (a) O.P. No.82 of 2011 pending in Family Court, Wayanad is withdrawn from that court and made over to Family Court, Ernakulam for trial and disposal. Tr.P(C) No.196 of 2011 -: 3 :- (b) The transferor court while transmitting records of the case to the transferee court shall fix the date for appearance of parties in the transferee court with due intimation to the counsel on both sides. (c) Family Court, Ernakulam shall ensure that O.P. No.82 of 2011 (transferred to it) and O.P(Div.) No.1190 of 2011 (pending in that court) are posted as far as possible on the same dates. (d) It is made clear that except when physical presence of respondent in the transferee court is necessary, he can appear through counsel. All pending interlocutory applications will stand dismissed. THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE. vsv