IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN THURSDAY, THE 27TH JANUARY 2011 / 7TH MAGHA 1932 Tr.P(C).No. 36 of 2011() ------------------------ OP.1215/2010 of FAMILY COURT, THIRUVALLA .................... PETITIONER: ----------------------- KUNJAMMA ALEX, AGED 70 YEARS, W/O.LATE.V.C.ALEX, A-17, KANAKA NAGAR, VELLAYAMBALAM P.O., NANTHENCODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.ANOOP (MULAVANA) RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- ARADHANA VARGHESE @ ATHIRA, AGED 24 YEARS, D/O.VARGHESE.K.A, KURAVANOLICKAL THONAMANKAL HOUSE, KEEKOZHOOR P.O., CHERUKOLE PANCHAYAT, CHERUKOLE VILLAGE, RANNY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT - 672 101. THIS TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------ Tr.P.(C).No.36 OF 2011 ------------------------------ Dated this the 27 th day of January, 2011 ORDER The third respondent in OP No.1215 of 2010 on the file of the Family Court, Thiruvalla has approached this court with this Transfer Petition praying to transfer the Original Petition from the Family Court, Thiruvalla to the Family Court, Thiruvananthapuram. 2. O.P.No.1215 of 2010 was filed by the respondent. The first respondent in the Original Petition before the Family Court is the husband of the respondent herein. The second respondent before the Family Court is the brother-in-law of the respondent. The petitioner herein is the mother-in-law of the respondent. 3. It is stated that the petitioner is aged 70 years and she is suffering from several old age diseases. The counsel submitted that the petitioner is not in a position to travel and appear before the Family Court, Thiruvalla. It is also pointed out that at the Tr.P.(C).No.36 OF 2011 2 instance of the respondent, Crime No.759 of 2010 was registered before the Museum Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram against the son of the petitioner. 4. There is no dispute that the Family Court, Thiruvalla has jurisdiction to try the Original Petition filed by the respondent. The only reason stated for transfer is the inability of the petitioner to appear personally before the Family Court, Thiruvalla. Her advanced age and health problems are projected as additional reasons for showing that it would be inconvenient for her to appear before the Family Court, Thiruvalla. 5. I do not think it is necessary for the petitioner, who is the third respondent in the Original Petition to appear before the Family Court on all the posting dates. The petitioner can very well seek the assistance of a counsel and apply for the necessary permission of the Family Court to appear through counsel. If an application is filed by the petitioner Tr.P.(C).No.36 OF 2011 3 pointing out her grievances, I am sure that the Family Court, will sympathetically consider the same and pass appropriate orders exempting her from personal appearance, except on occasions where her presence is absolutely essential. 6. It is made clear that even before getting the permission of the Family Court to engage a counsel, the petitioner may file appropriate application before the Family Court with the assistance of her sons who are respondents 1 and 2 in the Original Petition pending before the Family Court. With the above observations, the Transfer Petition is dismissed. K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE. cms