IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH MARCH 2010 / 26TH PHALGUNA 1931 Tr.P(C).No. 344 of 2009(A) ------------------------------ OP.617/2009 of FAMILY COURT, PALAKKAD .................... PETITIONER ------------------- DEEPA, D/O.RAJAN, ILLATHODI HOUSE, IRUMBLIYAM (PO), VALANCHERY, TIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.JAMSHEED HAFIZ RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. ANIL KUMAR, S/O.BALAKRISHNAN, KURUPPATHOTTATHIL HOUSE, KOTHACHIRA (PO), CHALUSHERY, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 2. DEVAKI, W/O.BALAKRISHNAN, KURUPPATHOTTATHIL HOUSE, KOTHACHIRA (PO), CHALUSHERY, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. R2 BY ADV. MR.JACOB SEBASTIAN THIS TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: P. BHAVADASAN, J --------------------------- T.P.C.No.344 OF 2009 ----------------------------------- Dated this the 17th day of March, 2009 O R D E R The petitioner in this petition seeks transfer of O.P.1617/09 pending before the Family Court, Palakkad to Family Court, Malappuram. 2. The petitioner is the wife of the first respondent. Second respondent is the mother in law. Marriage between the petitioner and the first respondent took place on 26.11.2001. They have two children in the wed lock. The elder son was born on 5.11.2002. He was in the custody of the 2nd respondent. Several allegations are made which resulted filing of the petition but which are not very relevant for the present purpose and hence are not being adverted to. Since the respondents are residing in Palakkad district and the child is with them the they filed O.P. before the Family Court, Palakkad. Petitioner pointed out that she stays in Malappuram far away from Palakkad and she is unemployed also. She had no means and ability to go to Palakkad on every posting days. It is pointed out that if the case is transferred to Family Court, Malappurm, it causes no prejudice T.P.C. No.344/09 2 to the respondents and they will have to travel only a lesser distance to reach Family Court Malappuram. Considering her pathetic situation and not much difficulties is caused to the respondents, the petitioner prayed for transfer of O.P. from Family court, Palakkad to Family Court Malappuram. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the respondent opposes the petition and stated that the minor is residing with respondents and minor is residing with within the jurisdiction of Family Court, Palakkad. It is pointed out that there is no justification in seeking transfer. 4. It is one thing to say that court has no territorial jurisdiction and quite another to say court has no inherent jurisdiction. By no stretch of imagination it could be said that Family Court, Malappuram has no jurisdiction. Therefore if they had transferred the O.P to Family Court, Malappuram, it may not illegal. 5. Petitioner has given certain reasons which has compelled her to move this petition. 6. As far as the respondents are concerned, first respondent can attend the court and it is not necessary for the petitioner to attend the court on all occasions and so also child has to be T.P.C. No.344/09 3 produced only if so ordered by the court. 7. It is also seen from the petition that the respondents will have to travel lesser distance to Malappuram. Considering the facts, I feel that the prayer is just and reasonable one. 8. It is therefore directed that O.P(G.W) 617/09 pending before the Family Court, Palakkad shall stand transferred to Family Court, Malappuram. It is made clear that unless physical presence of the parties are absolutely necessary and so ordered by the court, they need be present the court. Parties shall appear before Family Court, Malappuram on 10.6.2010. P. BHAVADASAN, JUDGE. Sou.