IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN THURSDAY, THE 23RD JULY 2009 / 1ST SRAVANA 1931 Tr.P(C).No. 154 of 2009 --------------------------------- OP.NO.445/2009 OF FAMILY COURT,ERNAKULAM. .................... PETITIONER: ------------------- PREETHA VINOD, W/O.VINOD XAVIER, AGED 31 YEARS, MUKKADAN HOUSE, RUBY NAGAR P.O., MADHUMOOLA, CHANGANASSERY. BY ADVS. MR.C.A.CHACKO, SMT.C.M.CHARISMA, MR.N.A.SHAFEEK. RESPONDENT: --------------------- VINOD XAVIER, S/O.LATE XAVIER, AGED 35 YEARS, KURISINGAL HOUSE, 49/1093-C1, INDIRA ROAD, EDAPPALLY P.O., KOCHI-24. BY ADV. THIS TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/07/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: prv. S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. ----------------------------------- Tr.P.C.No.154 of 2009 --------------------------------- Dated this the 23rd day of July, 2009 O R D E R Petition for transfer is filed under Section 24 CPC. Petitioner is the wife and respondent, the husband. The matrimonial disputes between the parties have given rise to three proceedings, two at the instance of the wife and one by the husband, pending in different family courts. Wife has filed two petitions, O.P.No.447/2009 and M.C.No.110/2009 against the husband, both pending before the Family Court, Kottayam, the former for return of gold ornaments and valuables allegedly retained by the husband, and the latter, claiming maintenance under Section 125 Cr.P.C. She seeks transfer of O.P.No.445/2009 filed by the husband for dissolution of the marriage, pending on the file of the Family court, Ernakulam to the Family Court, Kottayam. 2. Notice on the petition was given to the respondent which was returned with endorsement that he is out of India. Petitioner was then directed to serve notice on the counsel Tr.P.C.No.154 of 2009 2 appearing for the husband in the Family Court, Ernakulam and after such service, as directed, a memo has been filed. The respondent has not turned up after service of notice on his counsel. 3. I heard the counsel for the petitioner. 4. It is submitted that the wife has to attend two minor children, the eldest aged 6½ years old who is going to school and the other an infant, aged 1½ years old. She has already filed a petition seeking maintenance from the husband for her and also for the two minor children, invoking Section 125 Cr.P.C alleging neglect of the husband to maintain them and her inability for sustenance in life, is also canvassed by the counsel to contend that she is not in a position to go over to Family Court, Ernakulam to defend the proceedings initiated against her by the husband. 5. Having regard to the submissions made and taking note of the facts and circumstances presented, I find that the plea of an estranged wife from her husband facing the burden of taking care of two minor children all alone should be given due Tr.P.C.No.154 of 2009 3 consideration in appreciating the merit of the request for transfer. Needless to point out the two children separated from their father, whatever be the reasons for estrangement of the spouses, might be undergoing severe psychological pressure and in case if they are deprived of the care and attention of their mother also, if she is forced to attend to a family court, at a far off place to defend herself in a proceedings taken by her husband, the consequences on them may be severe and disastrous affecting their growth and well being. So much so, more than anything else, the interest of the children also demand transfer of O.P.No.445/2009 filed by the husband to the family court, Kottayam where two other petitions filed by the wife are pending adjudication. Further more, if all the cases are tried by the same court, it will be convenient for the parties to lead evidence in common, and joint trial of two or more cases if possible can be ordered, and it may also avoid loss of precious time of the court. The chance of conflicting decisions can also be ruled out if all the proceedings are before one court. Taking into consideration all these aspects, it is found essential to advance the interest of Tr.P.C.No.154 of 2009 4 justice to transfer O.P.No.445/2009 on the file of the Family Court, Ernakulam to Family Court, Kottayam, and it is ordered accordingly. The Judge, Family Court, Ernakulam shall transmit the records of O.P.No.445/2009 to the Family Court, Kottayam without delay. The transfer petition is allowed. On receipt of records the transferee court shall issue notice to the parties for appearance before that court. S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE. bkn/-