IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH WEDNESDAY, THE 27TH OCTOBER 2010 / 5TH KARTHIKA 1932 Tr.P(C).No. 271 of 2010() ------------------------- OP NO.23 OF 2010 OF FAMILY COURT, THRISSUR PETITIONER ------------------------------ SUBITHA,D/O.SUBRAMANIAN,PALLOORATHU VALAPPIL HOUSE,ITTONAM DESOM,PERINGOTTU(VIA), PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.SURIN GEORGE IPE RESPONDENT(S): --------------- UNNIKRISHNAN,S/O.BALAN,EDUPADICKAL, KUTTANELLOORE DESOM,OLLUR VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT 680306. ADV. SRI.SANTHOSH P.PODUVAL THIS TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- Tr.P.(C) No.271 of 2010 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 27th day of October, 2010. ORDER This petition is filed by the wife seeking transfer of O.P.No.23 of 2010 from Family Court, Thrissur to Family Court, Palakkad. That is a petition filed by the respondent/husband seeking divorce. Petitioner states that she is residing at Peringottu, in Palakkad District and that it is far away from Family Court, Thrissur. Her father is suffering from hypertension and diabetics and there is no other male member to accompany her to Family Court, Thrissur from Palakkad. So the request for transfer. 2. Respondent objected the request contending that he is unable to travel due to fracture of backbone suffered in a motor accident on 08.07.2000 and from then onwards he is finding it difficult to travel long distance. Respondent has produced a copy of the discharge card issued from Jubilee Mission Hospital, Thrissur. 3. I have heard both sides. Learned counsel for petitioner says that the accident was on 08.07.2000 and no recent document to evidence physical unfitness of respondent is produced. Learned counsel for respondent contends that respondent is still undergoing treatment and that fact is also mentioned in O.P.No.23 of 2010 which is sought to be transferred. Tr.P.(C) No.271/2010 2 4. I find from paragraph No.4 of Annexure-1, petition filed by the respondent seeking divorce that respondent has stated there also that he met with an accident involving damage to the backbone and was continuing treatment. In paragraph No.5 he states that he had to undergo a surgery on the backbone and had to wear belt for 1 ½ years thereafter. Respondent has produced the photocopy of the discharge summery issued from the Jubilee Mission Medical College, Thrissur. That refers to complete block of IVDP L4 and L5. True, accident was on 08.06.2000 and no documentary evidence regarding subsequent treatment is produced. 5. Now I shall consider the inconvenience of petitioner if request for transfer is disallowed. Petitioner belongs to Peringottu in Palakkad District. Even as per the statement of petitioner that she has to travel a distance of 45 kms to Family Court, Thrissur from her place of residence and if the case is transferred to Family Court, Palakkad she has to travel 25 kms. The difference is only 20 kms. 6. On the other hand I referred to the inconvenience and difficulties of respondent. When the hardship of petitioner/wife is compared with that of respondent/husband I am persuaded to think that here is a case where comparative hardship is more on the respondent. Inconvenience of respondent has also to be looked into. Having regard to the fact that the additional distance petitioner has to travel is only 20 kms I am not inclined to think that the request for transfer is to be allowed. Tr.P.(C) No.271/2010 3 Petition is dismissed. It is made clear that except when physical presence of petitioner in court is required she could appear through counsel. I.A.No.2244 of 2010 will stand dismissed. THOMAS P.JOSEPH, Judge. cks