IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH FRIDAY, THE 16TH JULY 2010 / 25TH ASHADHA 1932 TR.P(C).NO. 1 OF 2010() ---------------------------------- OP.1018/2009 OF FAMILY COURT,KOZHIKODE .................... PETITIONER ------------------- RANI MATHEW @ ELIZABETH, AGED 41 YEARS, NRA, 17, NALANDA, KOWDIAR P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SMT.SANDHYA RAJU RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ NOBLE THOMAS, S/O. M.A.THOMAS, AGED 40 YEARS, MANNANAKUNNEL VEE, THOTTUMUKKAM P.O., KODIYATHOOR AMSOM, PANNIKODU DESOM, KOZHIKODE TALUK. ADV. SRI.SUNNY MATHEW THIS TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P.JOSEPH, J. ==================================== Tr.P(C) No.1 of 2010 ==================================== Dated this the 16th day of July, 2010 O R D E R This petition is filed by the wife seeking a transfer of O.P. No.1018 of 2009 from Family Court, Kozhikode to Family Court, Thiruvananthapuram. Petitioner-wife states that she was driven out from the matrimonial home and thereon she, who is a resident of Kowdiar in Thiruvananthapuram City filed a petition before the local Magistrate under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence and thereon respondent filed O.P. No.1018 of 2009 in the Family Court, Kozhikode seeking divorce. It is stated that petitioner has to travel even by train for more than 10 hours to reach Kozhikode to contest the case. Petition is opposed by learned counsel for respondent. According to the learned counsel there is no sufficient reason to transfer the case from Family Court, Kozhikode to Thiruvananthapuram. 2. It is seen that petitioner is aged 41 years. She has to travel for more than 10 hours even by train to reach Kozhikode. Necessarily she has to be accompanied by some relatives which involves much expenses and inconvenience. The Supreme Court in Tr.P(C) No.1 of 2010 -: 2 :- 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 request for transfer of matrimonial proceedings convenience of the wife has to be looked into. That of course does not mean that inconvenience of the husband has to be ignored. Here, comparative hardship is more for the petitioner-wife than respondent-husband. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and taking into account the inconvenience wife has to suffer I am inclined to allow this petition. Resultantly, the petition is allowed in the following lines: (i) O.P. No.1018 of 2010 pending in Family Court, Kozhikode is withdrawn from that court and transferred to the Family Court, Thiruvananthapuram. (ii) The transferor court while transmitting records of the case to the transferee court shall fix date for appearance of the parties in the transferee court with due intimation to counsel for both parties. Tr.P(C) No.1 of 2010 -: 3 :- (iii) It is made clear that except when personal appearance of respondent in court is necessary he can appear through counsel. THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE. vsv