IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH TUESDAY, THE 20TH SEPTEMBER 2011 / 29TH BHADRA 1933 Tr.P(C).No. 307 of 2011() ------------------------- OP.800/2010 of FAMILY COURT, THIRUVALLA .................... PETITIONER/RESPONDENT ----------------------------------------- SCARIA CHEMBAKASSERIL,S/O.LATE VARKEY, 55 YEARS,CHEMBAKASSERIL,KUMBLERI POST,AMBALAVAYAL VILLAGE,SULTHAN BATHERY TALUK,WAYANAD DISTRICT, NOW RESIDING AT NEWYORK, USA , REP.BY POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER M.K.VARGHESE,AGED 58 YEARS,S/O.KURIAKOSE, MATHOKKIL HOUSE,KUMBLERI POST,AMBALAVAYAL VILLAGE, BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE MATHEWS RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER ------------------------- AJINI VARGHESE,25 YEARS, D/O.LATE N.V.VARGHESE,NUZHUMURIYIL, MALLAPPALLY MURI,MALLAPPALLY VILLAGE, MALAPPALLY TALUK. THIS TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/09/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Tr.P(C) NO.307/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: ANNEXURE-I TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 3.12.2007 IN OP 93/2007 OF THE FAMILY COURT, KALPETTA. //TRUE COPY// THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- Tr.P.(C) No.307 of 2011 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of September, 2011. ORDER This petition is filed by the husband for withdrawal and transfer of O.P.No.800 of 2010 of the Family Court, Thiruvalla to Family Court, Kalpetta . That is a petition filed by the respondent-wife for a declaration of nullity of marriage. Reason stated by the petitioner-husband for transfer is that he is represented by a power of attorny holder who is sick and unable to travel the whole distance. 2. Learned Senior Advocate appearing for petitioner states that petitioner had filed O.P.No.93 of 2010 in the Family Court, Kalpetta for restitution of conjugal rights through his power of attorney holder and that petition has been allowed. 3. 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 held that while considering Tr.P(C)No.307/2011 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 opposite party need not be considered. 4. It is seen that petitioner-husband is residing in Ambalavayal Village while respondent-wife, aged about 25 years is residing at Mallappally Village and Taluk. It is not disputed that the said place is far away from Kalpetta. Merely for the reason that power of attorney holder of petitioner is sick, I am unable to think that respondent-wife aged 25 years has to be asked to travel all the distance from her place of residence in Mallappally Village and Taluk to Kalpetta, beyond several districts. If the power of attorney holder of petitioner is sick, he has to make alternative arrangements if he is so advised. I am inclined to think that if the request for transfer is allowed that will cause much inconvenience and hardship to the respondent-wife. Hence the request for transfer has to be disallowed. 5. But, I make it clear that except when the physical presence is necessary it is open to the petitioner or his power of attorney holder to appear in the court concerned through counsel. If petitioner is desirous of having a Tr.P(C)No.307/2011 3 settlement of the dispute it is open to the parties or any of them as provided under law to request the Family Court concerned to try for a settlement of the dispute. Transfer petition is dismissed with the above directions. I.A.No.2068 of 2011 will stand dismissed. THOMAS P.JOSEPH, Judge. cks