IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH MONDAY, THE 4TH JULY 2011 / 13TH ASHADHA 1933 Tr.P(C).No. 114 of 2011() ------------------------- OP.331/2010 of FAMILY COURT, PALAKKAD .................... PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS ------------------------------------------- 1. LIJU @ NAJEEMA ABUBACKER,DOOR NO.20/616, CHARAKKADAVU,PAKKAM POST,KASARAGOD 671 316. 2. SHEIK ABOOBACKER,AGED 60 YEARS, DOOR NO.20/616,CHARAKKADAVU,PAKKAM POST, KASARAGOD 671 316. 3. S.RAJEENA,AGED 24 YEARS, D/O.SHEIK ABOOBACKER,DOOR NO.20/616, CHARAKKADAVU,PAKKAM POST, KASARAGOD 671 316. BY ADV. SRI.C.K.SREEJITH RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER ------------------------- SEBASTIAN JOSEPH @ THANKACHAN, KANIPARAMBIL HOUSE,PALAKKUZHY POST, KIZHAKKENCHERRY,ALATHUR TALUK,PALAKKAD DISTRICT 678 702. ADV. SRI.JOSE JOSEPH ARAYAKUNNEL SRI.ALBERT JOSEPH SRI.VARGHESE PARAMBIL THIS TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: TR.P(C) NO.114/2011 ORDER ON IA NO.1481/2011 CLOSED 04.07.2011 Sd/-THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE. APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: ANNEXURE-A1 TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF PETITION FILED IN OP 331/2010 ON THE FILE OF FAMILY COURT, PALAKKAD ANNEXURE-A2 TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT AND PETITION FILED ALONG WITH THE O.P.NO.331/2010 ON THE FILE OF FAMILY COURT, PALAKKAD //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- Tr.P.(C) No.114 of 2011 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 4th day of July, 2011. ORDER Petitioners are the maternal grand parents and paternal aunt of the child of whose custody is called in question in O.P.No.331 of 2010 of Family Court, Palakkad. It is stated that respondent married the daughter of petitioners 1 and 2, a muslim by religion. Thereafter she was converted and the marriage was solemnized in the church. A female child was born on 15.12.2003 and she was baptized on 21.02.2004. While so, wife of the respondent (mother of the child) committed suicide on 23.02.2010. Thereafter respondent filed O.P.No.331 of 2010 before Family Court, Palakkad for custody of the child. Petitioners want the case to be transferred to the Family Court, Kasaragod on the ground of their inconvenience to travel from their place of residence to Family Court, Palakkad and hence this petition. 2. The application is opposed by the respondent. According to the respondent, he is apprehensive of his life even if he goes to Kasaragod. Learned counsel has submitted that since petitioners belong to a particular religion to which the deceased also belonged and after registering the marriage the lady was converted and the marriage was solemnized in the church on 30.10.2003, petitioners are enmical towards the respondent. It is also the Tr.P.(C) No.114/2011 2 grievance of respondent that petitioners had forcibly taken his wife and the child to their place and following that, she was compelled to marry a person belonging to their community. Following that, she committed suicide. 3. It would appear that relationship between the parties is very much strained for various reasons including conversion of the lady from her religion. The parties cannot see eye to eye. There is merit in the apprehension of the respondent. This is not a case where the mother of the child has sought its custody and wants the proceeding to be transferred to her place of residence. Of the petitioners, second petitioner is aged about 60 years and the third petitioner is a lady (aunt of the child). Presence of third petitioner before court every now and then is not necessary except when she wishes to give evidence in the matter. The second petitioner is not that much old that he is unable to travel at all. As per Annexure-A1, the first petitioner should be aged 53 years. He could not have any difficulty to travel. Having regard to the apprehensions raised by both sides and the difficulty stated by petitioners to travel to Palakkad I am inclined to think that it is just and proper to transfer the case to a suitable place where the parties can agitate the case. Petitioners and respondent can go to Thrissur by train. In the circumstances I am inclined to direct transfer of the case to the Family Court, Thrissur. Tr.P.(C) No.114/2011 3 Resultantly this petition is allowed in the following lines: (i) O.P.No.331 of 2010 pending in Family Court, Palakkad is withdrawn from that court and transferred to Family Court, Thrissur for trial and disposal. (ii) The transferor court while transmitting records of the case to the transferee court shall fix date for appearance of parties in the transferee court with due intimation to the counsel for both parties. (iii) Parties can appear in the transferee court through counsel except when their physical presence is required. . I.A.No.1481 of 2011 will stand dismissed. THOMAS P.JOSEPH, Judge. cks