IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH TUESDAY, THE 15TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 24TH KARTHIKA 1933 TR.P(C).NO. 300 OF 2011() ------------------------------------ OP.1560/2010 OF FAMILY COURT, NEDUMANGAD .................... PETITIONER: ------------------- DEVAPRAKASH.P., S/O. JOSEPH PHILIP, KALLADAPARAMBIL HOUSE, KULAMAVU, IDUKKI DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.PRAVEEN KUMAR RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- REMA.V., ANATHARA VEEDU, T.C. 36/1577, SREEVARAHAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. PIN-695001. ADV. SRI.K.P.SUJESH KUMAR FOR R1 THIS TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Tr.P.(C) No.300 of 2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS: ANNEXURE I. A TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FILED BY THE RESPONDENT BEFORE THE HONOURABLE FAMILY COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM (O.P. NO.1484 OF 2010). ANNEXURE II. A TRUE COPY OF PETITION FILED BY THE RESPONDENT BEFORE THE HONOURABLE FAMILY COURT, NEDUMANGAD (O.P. NO.1560 OF 2010) RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: NIL TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE THOMAS P.JOSEPH, J. ==================================== Tr.P(C) No.300 of 2011 ==================================== Dated this the 15th day of November, 2011 O R D E R This petition is filed by the husband for transfer of O.P. No.1560 of 2010 from the Family Court, Nedumangad to the Family Court, Thiruvananthapuram. That is a petition filed by the respondent-wife for restitution of conjugal rights. Respondent has filed O.P. No.1484 of 2010 in the Family court, Thiruvananthapuram seeking maintenance from petitioner. Petitioner states that he is residing at Kulamavu, in Idukki District and that he has to travel a long distance from his place of residence to Nedumangad to contest the case. According to the petitioner it is convenient to both parties if the cases are consolidated in the Family Court, Thiruvananthapuram. 2. Petition is opposed by the respondent. It is contended that respondent met with a motor accident on 11.12.2004 and is undergoing treatment for injuries sustained in that accident even now. It is submitted that respondent filed O.P. No.1484 of 2010 in the Family court, Thiruvananthapuram at at time when she was staying in a rented house at Sreevaraham and presently she is residing at Kuttichal, near Nedumangad along with her parents. It Tr.P(C) No.300 of 2011 -: 2 :- is also stated that instruction given to the counsel is that respondent stopped working at Sreevaraham. Learned counsel submitted that in the circumstances it is the convenience of the wife that has to be looked into and hence request for transfer may not be allowed. 3. True that 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) took the view that convenience of wife has to be looked into in the request for transfer of matrimonial proceedings. But that does not mean that inconvenience of the husband shall not be considered. Respondent met with the motor accident way back in 11.12.2004 and may be because she was staying at Sreevaraham then, she filed O.P. No.1484 of 2010 in the Family Court, Thiruvananthapuram. No request for transfer of that case to Nedumangad is made during the last one year. Even after petitioner filed this petition, respondent did not think of seeking transfer of O.P. No.1484 of 2011 from the Family Court, Thiruvananthapuram to the Family Court, Nedumangad. As things stand now, cases between the parties are pending in two courts. It is appropriate that cases are tried and disposed of by Tr.P(C) No.300 of 2011 -: 3 :- the same court. 4. Assuming that respondent is staying at her paternal home at Kuttichal, the distance from that place to Thiruvananthapuram according to respondent is about 30 kms. On the other hand, petitioner is residing at Kulamavu which is in an interior part of Idukki District. He cannot go by train to Thiruvananthapuram. He has to catch bus from Kulamauv to Idukki and then to Thiruvananthapuram. From Thiruvananthapuram he has to go by bus to Nedumangad. He has to travel around 200 kms if not more. It may even take three days for petitioner to reach home after attending the court. In such a situation, some indulgence is required to be shown in favour of petitioner-husband. The additional distance respondent may have to travel if the case is transferred to Thiruvananthapuram is only around 25 kms. That inconvenience of the respondent can be reduced by permitting her to appear in the transferee court through counsel except when her physical presence is required. I am inclined to allow the petition. Resultantly, the Petition is allowed as follows: (a) O.P. No.1560 of 2010 pending in Tr.P(C) No.300 of 2011 -: 4 :- the Family Court, Nedumangad is withdrawn from that court and made over to the Family Court, Thiruvananthapuram for trial and disposal. (b) The transferor court while transmitting records of the case to the transferee court shall fix the date for appearance of parties in the transferee court with due intimation to the counsel on both sides. (c) The Family Court, Thiruvananthapuram shall ensure that O.P. No.1560 of 2010 (transferred to it) and O.P. No.1484 of 2010 (pending in that court) are posted as far as possible on the same dates. (d) It is made clear that except when physical presence of parties is required, they can appear through counsel. All pending interlocutory applications will stand dismissed. THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE. vsv