IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN THURSDAY, THE 27TH AUGUST 2009 / 5TH BHADRA 1931 Tr.P(C).No. 171 of 2009() ---------------------------------- OP.442/2009 OF THE FA MILY COURT, KOZHIKODE ...... PETITIONER (S): RESPONDENT: ------------------------------- SEENA C.M., AGED 40 YEARS, D/O.NANU C.M., MULLAN HOUSE, KEEZHANTHIMUKKU, THIRUVANGAD P.O.. THALASSERY, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.M.SASINDRAN RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER: -------------------------- RAJESH A., AGED 47 YEARS, S/O.BALAN, ANDISSERY HOUSE, KALLAI P.O., PANNIYANKARA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. R1 BY ADV.MR.E.NARAYANAN THIS TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER ON IA. NO.1232/2009 IN TRPC. 171/2009 DISMISSED 27/08/2009 SD/- S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE tss S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. ----------------------------------- Tr.P.C.No.171 of 2009 --------------------------------- Dated this the 27th day of August, 2009 O R D E R Petition for transfer is filed under Section 24 CPC. Petitioner is the wife and respondent, the husband. Wife seeks transfer of O.P.No.442 of 2009 filed by the husband before the Family Court, Kozhikode seeking for dissolution of marriage. She is permanently settled at Kannur and she has none to accompany or assist her to go over to the Family Court, Kozhikode and defend the case launched by the husband against her, is her case. 2. Notice being given, the husband has entered appearance. 3. Learned counsel for the husband took serious objections contending that some of the allegations in the transfer are bereft of any truth. So far as the transfer petition is concerned, the allegations and contentions advanced by the parties in a matrimonial dispute need not be adverted to or examined in detail. The only question to be considered is the Tr.P.C.No.171 of 2009 2 comparative hardship of the parties as to whether the request for transfer deserves to be allowed or not. Naturally, when a petition is filed by the husband, in weighing the comparative hardship more consideration will be given to the hardship suffered by the wife. Wife is shown to be unemployed and further pleads that she has none to accompany her to go over to the Family Court, situate at a far off place. In the absence of any material showing otherwise her request for transfer deserve to be accepted so. 4. Having regard to the submissions made, I order for transfer of O.P.No.442 of 20098 from the Family Court, Kozhikode to the Family Court, Kannur. The Judge, Family Court, Kozhikode shall transmit the records of the above petition without delay. The Family Court, Kannur on receipt of records shall give notice to the parties for appearance. Learned counsel for the husband request for a direction to the Family Court, Kannur to dispense with his personal appearance of the respondent before that court. It is open to the respondent to move such an application stating the grounds in support thereof for such exemption and needless to point out the Judge, Family Tr.P.C.No.171 of 2009 3 Court, Kannur shall consider such application on its merits. Subject to the above direction/observation the petition is disposed. S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE. bkn/-