IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 7TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 18TH MAGHA 1929 Tr.P(C).No. 265 of 2007() ------------------------- OP.225/2006 of FAMILY COURT, NEDUMANGAD .................... PETITIONER/PETITIONER: --------------------------------- SANDHYA BHARGAVAN, AGED 30 YEARS, D/O.BHARGAVAN,HAVING PERMANENT ADDRESS AT B-68, PURU HOUSING SOCIETY,AIRPORT ROAD,PUNE,MAHARASHTRA & PRESENTLY RESIDING AT "LEKSHMIPRIYA",PROFESSOR'S COLONY, VIDYA NAGAR, PERUNNA P.O.,CHANGANASSERY, KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.G.P.SHINOD SRI.RAM MOHAN.G. SRI.MANU V. RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS: -------------------------------------------- 1. SANDEEP MADHAVAN,AGED 32,SON OF C.K.- MADHAVAN,PRSNTLY.EMPLD.AT ANSEARCH LTD,LEVEL27 IBM CENTRE,NO.60,CITY RD.,MELBOURNE 3006,AUSTRALIA HIS LAST KNOWN ADD: IN AUSTRALIA-14/70,EDGAR STREET, NORTH GLEN IRIS,VICTORIA 3146,MELBOURNE,IN INDIA BAIJU BHAVAN,MILAMATTATHIL,TEMPLE RD.,CHANGANASERI 2. C.K. MADHAVAN, AGED ABOUT 65 YEARS, S/O. KOCHUKUNJU, RESIDING AT BAIJU BHAVAN, MILAMATTATHIL, TEMPLE ROAD, VAZHAPPALLY EAST, CHANGANASSERI. 3. NALINI MADHAVAN, AGED ABOUT 54 YEARS, W/O. C.K. MADHAVAN, RESIDING AT -DO- -DO-. BY ADV. SRI.R.T.PRADEEP THIS TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/02/2008, ALONG WITH TPCR NO. 92 OF 2007 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.N. KRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Tr.P.C. (Crl.)NO. 92 OF 2007 & Tr.P.C. (Civil) No. 265 OF 2007 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 7th day of February, 2008. J U D G M E N T Tr.P.C. 265/07 is preferred to transfer O.P.225/06 pending before the Family Court, Nedumangad to Family Court, Ettumanoor and the other petition is filed to transfer M.C. 58/06 pending before the Family Court, Nedumangad to the Family Court, Ettumanoor for trial and disposal. The wife is the transfer petitioner and the husband is employed abroad in Australia in Melbourne. It is submitted by the counsel for the transfer petitioner that the power of attorney holder and the wife are residing very near to the Ettumanoor Family Court and therefore transfer of the case may be effected. Counsel for the respondent would contend that chief-examination affidavit had already been filed before that Court and only cross-examination is to be done and matter Tr.P.C. (Crl.)NO. 92/07 & Tr.P.C.265/07 -:2:- to be disposed of and it is only on account of the non- cooperation of the wife the matter is getting protracted. To counter the same the learned counsel for the transfer petitioner would contend that his urgency is explicit from the way in which he has moved this Court for a direction for trial and disposal and there is no force in the said contention. Whatever it may be, now the matter has reached a stage wherein chief-examination affidavit has been filed and cross- examination is to be done. So having reached that stage it is not desirable to transfer the case to another Court which will again further delay the matter in spite of urgency pleaded by both parties. Therefore I decline to transfer the case but give direction to the Family Court at Nedumangad to dispose of the matter as expeditiously as possible at any rate within a time limit of two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. But that does not mean that reasonable accommodation need not be granted to ensure that trial is completed and judgment is pronounced within the stipulated time. Respondents in the case against whom maintenance Tr.P.C. (Crl.)NO. 92/07 & Tr.P.C.265/07 -:3:- case is filed, also may not drag the petitioner to go to Nedumangad every time to get her meager maintenance of life. Either he can send it by Money Order or by other modes which will enable her to get the money. The Tr.P.Cs. are disposed of accordingly. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. ul/-