IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH MONDAY, THE 11TH OCTOBER 2010 / 19TH ASWINA 1932 Tr.P(C).No. 253 of 2010() ------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------------- SINDHU, D/O.RAVI, VILANGOOR DEVASWOMPARAMBU, A.N.PURAM, ALAPPUZHA, PRESENTLY RESIDING AT KALARIKKAPARAMBU, MANJELIPADOM, TRIPUNITHURA. BY ADV. SRI.P.A.AUGUSTINE(AREEKATTEL) RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. G.ARAVINDAKSHAN, S/O.GOVINDAN, RESIDING AT KANNAMANGALAM, A.N.PURAM, ALAPPUZHA. 2. RAJAN, S/O.SAVITHRY, RESIDING AT KUDUMBI COLONY, A.N.PURAM, ALAPPUZHA. ADV. SRI.M.P.MADHAVANKUTTY FOR R1 THIS TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P JOSEPH, J. ---------------------------------------- Tr.P(C).No.253 of 2010 --------------------------------------- Dated this 11th day of October, 2010 ORDER Respondent No.2 is served but there is no appearance. Heard counsel for petitioner and respondent No.1. 2. This petition is filed by the wife seeking transfer of O.P.No.137 of 2010 from Family Court, Alappuzha to Family Court, Ernakulam. Petitioner is now staying with her aunt at Tripunithura, in Ernakulam District. Respondent No.1/husband belongs to A.N Puram, in Alappuzha District. Petitioner states that she has to travel a long distance from her place of residence to Alappuzha to contest the case. She has filed M.C.No.159 of 2009 in Family Court, Ernakulaqm seeking maintenance from respondent No.1. Hence the request for transfer. Application is opposed by respondent No.1. According to the learned counsel for respondent No.1 there is no reason to transfer the case to Family Court, Ernakulam. 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 request for Tr.P(C).No.253 of 2010 : 2 : transfer in matrimonial proceedings convenience of the wife has to be looked into. It is seen that petitioner is staying at Tripunithura. Already she has filed M.C.No.159 of 2009 in Family Court, Ernakulam seeking maintenance from respondent No.1. If O.P.No.137 of 2010 continues at Family Court, Alappuzha petitioner has to travel a long distance. Moreover, since M.C.No.159 of 2009 is pending in Family Court, Ernakulam it is convenient that both the cases are tried and disposed of by the same court. Hence I am inclined to allow this petition. Resultantly this petition is allowed in the following lines: (i) O.P.No.137 of 2010 pending in Family Court, Alappuzha is withdrawn from that court and made over to Family Court, Ernakulam (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) Family Court, Ernakulam is directed to post, as far as possible all the cases on the same dates. (THOMAS P JOSEPH, JUDGE) Sbna/-