IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH MONDAY, THE 27TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 5TH ASWINA 1932 Tr.P(C).No. 199 of 2010() ------------------------- OP.191/2010 of FAMILY COURT, KASARAGOD .................... PETITIONER/RESPONDENT ----------------------------------------- SANDHYA, D/O.SREEDHARAN NABIAR, "DARSANA", CHORODE EAST, BADAGARA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN-673 106. BY ADV. SRI.K.RAKESH ROSHAN SMT.THUSHARA.V RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER ------------------------- P.RAJ MOHAN NAIR, S/O.KUNHAMBU NAIR, "VRINDAVAN", MOOLA KANDAM, P.O.ANANTHASRAMAM, KASARGOD, PIN - 671 321. ADV. SMT.T.SUDHAMANI THIS TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27/09/2010 ALONG WITH TPC NO. 201 OF 2010 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- Tr.P.(C) Nos.199 of 2010 & 201 of 2010 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 27th day of September, 2010. ORDER These petitions are for transfer of O.P.Nos.191 of 2010 and 123 of 2010 of Family Court, Kasaragod to Family Court, Kannur. Petitioner/wife is a resident of Vadakara, in Kozhikode Distric while respondent/husband belongs to Kasaragod. O.P.Nos.191 of 2010 and 123 of 2010 are filed by the respondent for custody of children and restitution of conjugal rights. Petitioner/wife has filed O.P.No.447 of 2010 and M.C.No.227 of 2010 in Family Court, Kannur for divorce and seeking maintenance for herself and children. It is stated that petitioner has to travel a long distance from her place of residence to Kasaragod to contest cases pending in Family Court, Kasaragod. It is also stated that since two cases are pending in Family Court, Kannur it is necessary that all the cases are consolidated in the same court and tried and disposed of together. Learned counsel requested that in the circumstances O.P.Nos.191 of 2010 and 123 of 2010 may be transferred to Family Court, Kannur. 2. 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 Tr.P.(C) Nos.199 & 201/2010 2 request for transfer of matrimonial proceedings convenience of the wife has to be looked into. True that does not mean that inconvenience if any of the husband need not be considered. 3. It is not disputed that two cases filed by petitioner/wife are pending in Family Court, Kannur. Respondent has not so far sought transfer of those cases to Family Court, Kasaragod for any reason whatsoever. Petitioner/wife is staying at Vatakara, in Kozhikode District and if the cases continued at Family Court, Kasaragod, she has to travel a long distance. She may have to be accompanied by some relatives which involves huge expenses. Moreover two cases are pending in Family Court, Kannur. It is necessary that all the cases are consolidated in the same court for a proper decision of the case. Considering the hardship of petitioner I am inclined to allow these petitions. Resultantly these petitions are allowed in the following lines: i. O.P. Nos.191 of 2010 and 123 of 2010 of Family Court, Kasaragod are withdrawn from that court and made over to Family Court, Kannur for trial and disposal. ii. The transferor court shall, while transmitting records of the cases to the transferee court fix date for appearance of parties in the transferee court with due intimation to the counsel on both sides. Tr.P.(C) Nos.199 & 201/2010 3 iii. It is made clear that except when physical presence of parties is required in the transferee court it is open to them to appear through counsel. iv. Transferee court shall ensure that as far as possible all the cases are posted on the same dates. I.A.No.1703 of 2010 in Tr.P.(C) No.199 of 2010 and I.A.No.1706 of 2010 in Tr.P.(C) No.201 of 2010 will stand dismissed. THOMAS P.JOSEPH, Judge. cks