IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH WEDNESDAY, THE 13TH JULY 2011 / 22ND ASHADHA 1933 Tr.P(C).No. 134 of 2011() ------------------------- OP.343/2011 of FAMILY COURT,ERNAKULAM TO FAMILY COURT, KOTTAYAM AT ETTUMANOOR. ............................................ PETITIONER: ----------------------- SHERLY, W/O. JACOB ANTONY, NOW RESIDING AT NEDUVAYALIL HOUSE, AYARKUNNAM, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.JOMY GEORGE, SRI.SEBASTIAN THOMAS. RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- JACOB ANTONY, KONNOTH HOUSE, PERUMANOOR, KOCHI, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.V.R.KESAVA KAIMAL THIS TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss Tr.P(C)NO.134/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES: ANNEX.A1: COPY OF O.P.DIVORCE NO.343/2011 DT. 18/02/2011 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, ERNAKULAM. ANNEX.A2: COPY OF MC.NO.91/2011 DTD. 18/03/2011 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, KOTTAYAM AT ETTUMANOOR. RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES: N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss THOMAS P JOSEPH, J. ---------------------------------------- Tr.P(C).No.134 of 2011 --------------------------------------- Dated this 13th day of July, 2011 ORDER Petitioner/wife seeks transfer of O.P(Div).No.343 of 2011 from the Family Court, Ernakulam to Family Court, Kottayam at Ettumanoor. That is a petition filed by the respondent/husband for dissolution of marriage. According to the petitioner, she is residing at Ayarkunnam, in Kottayam District and it is difficult for her to travel all the distance from that place to Ernakulam. Hence the request for transfer. 2. Petition is opposed by the respondent. Learned counsel submitted that it is the second marriage of petitioner and the respondent, respondent has two children in his first marriage the eldest being an engineering student studying in Karnataka State and the youngest, a 10th standard student. Learned counsel submitted that the eldest son met with an accident and is convalescing at the residence of respondent. There is nobody to look after him and the youngest child. It is also stated that respondent is suffering from disk pro-lapse and other illness. In the circumstance, request for transfer to Ettumanoor may not be allowed. Learned counsel submitted that though various Tr.P(C).No.134 of 2011 -: 2 :- decisions of the Apex Court favour transfer of matrimonial proceeding to the place of residence of the wife, this case has to be viewed separately having regard to the difficulties which respondent is suffering. 3. The Supreme Court in Sumitha Singh Vs. Sanjay Kumar & Another (AIR 2002 SC 396) and Arti Rani Lrs. Pinki Devi and Another Vs. Darmendra Kumar Gupta (2008 (9) SCC 353) has stated that while considering the request for transfer in matrimonial proceedings convenience of the wife has to be looked into. No doubt, the said decisions do not say that inconvenience of the husband shall not be looked into. In appropriate cases that also has to be looked into. Here, petitioner aged 44 years is a resident of Ayarkunnam, in Kottayam District which itself is away from Family Court at Ettumannoor. Respondent is aged about 54 years and is a resident of Perumanoor, in Kochi. It is true that as per the submission of learned counsel, respondent has some illness. But, I must bear in mind the inconvenience that a lady aged 44 years has to undergo by travelling, if necessary alone from her place of residence at Ayarkunnam to Ernakulam every now and then. Having regard to the comparative hardship of the parties I am inclined to lean in Tr.P(C).No.134 of 2011 -: 3 :- favour of petitioner and grant relief to her. At the same time the inconvenience that may be caused to the respondent can be reduced by directing that he need appear in the trial court only when his physical presence is required. Resultantly this petition is allowed in the following lines: (i) O.P(Div).No.343 of 2011 pending in Family Court, Ernakulam is withdrawn from that court and made over to Family Court, Kottayam at Ettumanoor. (ii) The transferor court shall transmit records of the case to the transferee court with due intimation to the counsel on both sides as to the date of appearance in the transferee court. (iii) It is made clear that except when physical presence of respondent is necessary it is open to him to appear through counsel in the transferee court. (THOMAS P JOSEPH, JUDGE) Sbna/-