IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH WEDNESDAY, THE 26TH MAY 2010 / 5TH JYAISHTA 1932 Tr.P(C).No. 99 of 2010() ------------------------ O.P.NO.70 OF 2010 OF FAMILY COURT, NEDUMANGAD PETITIONER ------------------------------ ROSHNI R., AGED 26 YEARS, W/O.MUKESH KUMAR GANDHI, PUSHPANJALI HOUSE, MUTTOM P.O., HARIPAD. BY ADV. SRI.RINNY STEPHEN CHAMAPARAMPIL RESPONDENT(S): --------------- MUKESH KUMAR GANDHI, AGED 30 YEARS,, S/O.R.S.GANDHI, PERINGETTU, KADAKKAVOOR P.O., KADAKKAVOOR VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. THIS TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- Tr.P.(C) No.99 of 2010 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 26th day of May, 2010. ORDER Respondent is served on this petition, but he remains absent. 2. Petitioner is the wife of respondent. She filed O.P.No.297 of 2010 in the Family Court, Alappuzha seeking restitution of conjugal rights. Respondent responded by filing O.P.No.70 of 2010 in the Family Court, Nedumangad seeking divorce. Prayer of petitioner/wife is to withdraw the case pending in Family Court, Nedumangad and transfer the same to Family Court, Alappuzha. It is stated that petitioner/wife is residing with her aged parents at Harippad which is more than 100 kms. away from Nedumangad and that she has a breast feeding child. Learned counsel states that it is to harass petitioner that respondent has filed the petition for divorce in the Family Court at Nedumangad and that petitioner/wife finds it difficult to travel the distance from Harippad to Nedumangad. 3. The Supreme Court in Sumitha Singh v. Kumar Sanjay and another (AIR 2002 SC 396) has stated that in matrimonial proceedings while court considers prayer for transfer it is the convenience of wife that must be looked into. True, every case should be decided on the facts and circumstances of that case. Here, having regard to the facts and Tr.P.(C) No.99/2010 2 circumstances I am inclined to think that convenience of petitioner has to be given precedence over that of the respondent. In the circumstances I am inclined to allow this petition. Resultantly this petition is allowed in the following lines: i. O.P.No.70 of 2010 pending in Family Court, Nedumangad is withdrawn from that court and transferred to Family Court, Alappuzha where O.P.No. 297 of 2010 is pending consideration. ii. The transferor court shall, while transmitting the records of the case to the transferee court fix date of appearance of parties in the transferee court with notice to counsel on both sides. iii. Petitioner shall suffer her cost in this proceeding. I.A.No.889 of 2010 will stand dismissed. THOMAS P.JOSEPH, Judge. cks