IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH APRIL 2008 / 20TH CHAITHRA 1930 Tr.P(C).No. 79 of 2008 ------------------------------ OS.140/2007 OF FAMILY COURT,KOLLAM .................... PETITIONER: ------------------- SHEEBA, D/O. SAINABA, MUSLIM, HOUSE WIFE, AGED 25 YEARS, SEENA MANZIL, MUSLIM STREET, KOTTARAKKARA, KOTTARAKKARA VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.BABU (VETTAKALAYIL), SRI.JOHNSON GOMEZ. RESPONDENT: ---------------------- SHAMEER KHAN, MUSLIM, BUSINESS, AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, S/O. MUHAMMED KUNJU, KALLUVILA PADINJATTATHIL, UMAYANALLOOR P.O., MYLAPUR, THAZHUTHALA VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY THIS TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/04/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.N.KRISHNAN, J ===================== T.P.(C) No.79 OF 2008 ===================== Dated this the 9th day of April 2008 JUDGMENT This transfer petition is filed with a prayer to transfer O.S.No.140 of 2007 pending before the Family Court, Kollam to the Family Court, Kottarakkara. It is a suit for realisation of amount filed by the husband against the divorced wife and other family members. The only criteria averred is regarding the distance factor. The place of residence of the petitioner is about 35 kms away from the Family Court, Kollam whereas she has to travel only 2 Kms to reach the Family court at Kottarakkara. In the 21st century a distance of 35 kms cannot be considered as a distance to travel. I don't take it as a ground for transfer. The Apex Court in the decision reported in Anindita Das v. Srijit Das(2006) 9 SCC 197) where the court held that “at one stage the Supreme Court was showing leniency to ladies. But since then it has been found that a large number of transfer petitions are filed by women taking advantage of the leniency shown by the Supreme Court. On an average at least 10 to 15 transfer petitions are on board of each court on each admission day. It is, therefore, clear that Tr.P(C) 79/2008 -:2:- leniency of the Supreme Court is being misused by the women. The Supreme Court is now required to consider each petition on its merit”. Here, there is no merit and therefore it cannot be considered. Hence it is dismissed. But, I make it clear that the court shall not insist for the presence of the divorced wife on each and every hearing date and the defendants may be directed to be present only for the purpose of conciliation or for evidence, when it is necessary. If genuine applications are filed for exemption that also may be considered liberally by the court. M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE Cdp/-