IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 4TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 15TH MAGHA 1929 Tr.P(C).No. 264 of 2007() ------------------------- OPHMA.584/2007 of FAMILY COURT,KOLLAM .................... PETITIONER ----------------- NISHA, W/O.BABU, AGED 31 YEARS, ROYAL APARTMENTS, VYAPARAPPADI, MANJERI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.B.PREMNATH (E) RESPONDENT: ------------- BABU.S., S/O.M.SUKUMARAN, AGED 39 YEARS, LEELA NIVAS, HARISREE NAGAR-55, ASRAMAM (SOUTH), KOLLAM, PIN 691 001. BY ADV. SRI.K.ABDUL JAWAD THIS TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER ON I.A.No.3063/07 IN TR.P.C.264/07 //DISMISSED// 04.2.08. SD/= (M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE) M.N.KRISHNAN, J. -------------------------- Tr.P.C. NO. 264 OF 2007 --------------------- Dated this the 4thday of February, 2008 ORDER This petition is filed by the petitioner/wife with a prayer to transfer OP (HMA) 584/07 pending before the Family Court, Kollam, to the Family Court, Malappuram. 2. The unfortunate couple got married and in their wedlock a child aged 5 years is there, who is staying with the mother and studying in the school. The respondent/husband is an employee of the Kerala State Electricity Board and the wife is a teacher working in one of the schools in Vandoor in Malappuram District. 3. Now, the contention of the wife is that on account of the borrowal, a sizable portion from her salary is recovered and there is nobody to accompany her every time to reach Kollam for conducting the case and that the education of the child will also be effected. On the other hand, learned counsel for the respondent strongly contends that the grounds averred are absolutely incorrect and it is only a ruse to get the transfer of the case. 4. I have gone through the affidavit in detail. The fact remains that the lady is working as a teacher in Vandoor and the child is staying with her and that she has nobody to accompany her every time to Kollam Tr.P.C. No.264/07 2 for conducting the case. In many decisions it is made clear that in the case of transfer what is to be considered is the comparative hardship of the parties. It is always difficult for a lady to travel alone from Malappuram to Kollam every time and she may not be able to return back on the very same day and certainly that will cause embarrassment to her. So taking into consideration all these factors, I hold that comparative hardship is more on the wife than the husband. At the same time, I make it clear that unnecessary harassment of the husband has also to be curtailed. Therefore I transfer OP (HMA) 584/07, pending before the Family Court, Kollam, to the Family Court, Malappuram. I further direct the court below not to insist for the presence of the husband on every posting date and further if proper applications are filed with genuine reasons for exemption, that may also be liberally granted so that unnecessary hardship to the husband also can be averted. The transfer petition is disposed of accordingly. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE vps Tr.P.C. No.264/07 3