IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN MONDAY, THE 24TH AUGUST 2009 / 2ND BHADRA 1931 Tr.P(C).No. 215 of 2009() -------------------------------------- MC.141/2009 of FAMILY COURT,KOLLAM .................... PETITIONER(S) ------------------------- DR.S.NAJEEB, AGED 45 YEARS, SON OF SHAMSUDDIN LABBA, BREEZE LAND, MAMAM, ATTINGAL, CHIRAYINKIL TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADVS.MR.S.D.ASOKAN MR.R.ANILKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. SOPHIA, AGED 33 YEARS, D/O.M.M.HAKIM, PRANAVAM, NO.13, VIKAS NAGAR, KARIKKODU, KOLLAM. 2. FASIL NAJEEB, AGED 9 YEARS, PRANAVAM, NO.13, VIKAS NAGAR, KARIKKODU, KOLLAM, MINOR THROUGH HIS MOTHER, THE IST RESPONDENT. 3. FIROZ NAJEEB, AGED 7 YEARS, PRANAVAM, NO.13, VIKAS NAGAR, KARIKKODU, KOLLAM, MINOR THROUGH HIS MOTHER, THE IST RESPONDENT. R1 BY ADV. MR.ALEX N.MATHEW (KOLLAM) THIS TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/08/2009, ALONG WITH TPC NO. 216 OF 2009 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER ON IA. NO.1852 /2009 IN TrP(C) NO.215/2009 CLOSED 24/08/2009 SD/- S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE tss S.S. SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Tr.P.(C) Nos.215 & 216 of 2009 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated: 24th August, 2009 ORDER These two petitions are filed under Section 24 of the C.P.C. Petitioner is the husband and the respondent, the wife. Wife has filed two petitions, one claiming maintenance for herself and the two children as M.C.No.141 of 2009 and the other for return of valuables and gold ornaments as O.P.No.628 of 2009, both before the Family Court, Kollam. Transfer of the petitions is sought by the husband presenting a case that he has commenced a proceeding as O.P.(GW) No.494 of 2009 for getting the custody of the two children before the Family Court, Nedumangad. It is his case that transfer of the cases filed by the wife to the Family Court, Nedumangad will not cause the wife any inconvenience. He has a further case that he suffers from hypertension and so much so, require continuous medical treatment. He has also expressed apprehension of threat to life from the hands of the powerful and influential relatives of the wife, as another ground justifying for transfer of the petitions filed by the wife to the Family Court, Nedumangad. 2. Notice on the petitions given, the wife has entered appearance. I heard the counsel on both sides. At the time of Tr.P.C.215 & 216/09 - 2 - hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there was a mistake in the petition with respect to O.P.(G.W.) filed by the husband in stating that petition was pending at the time of filing of the transfer petition. Actually that petition was disposed earlier as not pressed, submits the counsel. However, learned counsel pressed into service the other circumstances highlighted in the petitions requesting for transfer of the two petitions filed by the wife from Family Court, Kollam to the Family Court, Nedumangad. The husband is prepared to meet the conveyance charges of the wife is the further submission of the counsel to sustain the reliefs claim in these petitions. On the other hand, learned counsel for the wife resisting the application submitted that the wife has to lookafter two children aged 9 and 7 years, both of them attending the schools. It is contended by the counsel that the husband is residing at Mamam in Attingal situate nearly 30 K.M. from Kollam. According to the learned counsel, the distance between the Family Court, Nedumangad from Mamam is 45 K.M. Learned counsel would further submit that there is no basis for the apprehension raised by the husband as to the threat from the relatives of the wife. If any transfer as desired by the husband is ordered, it is submitted, it would cause severe hardship Tr.P.C.215 & 216/09 - 3 - and lot of inconvenience to the wife. In considering the question of transfer in a matrimonial proceeding comparative hardship of the parties has to be examined and in doing so, naturally the inconvenience and difficulties likely to be faced by the wife may require more sympathetic consideration. Admittedly, after the separation of these spouses which is stated to be in 2006, i.e., three years prior to the commencement of the proceedings between them, the wife is maintaining the children having their custody. Both the children are attending to schools at Kollam is not disputed. In a case of this nature, the interests of the minor children also deserve to be taken note of. For the time being, in view of the matrimonial disputes between the spouses, the children are deprived of the care, love and affection of their father. If the wife mother is compelled to go over to Family Court, Nedumangad leaving the children unattended, then naturally it will affect their well being apart from having psychological impact as well. So, considering the interest of the minor children, which has to be given paramount importance, I find the request for transfer made by the husband cannot be entertained. He suffers from some ailments and he apprehends threat from the relatives of the wife cannot be given unmerited consideration especially in the Tr.P.C.215 & 216/09 - 4 - background that the wife has filed an application for maintenance from the husband advancing a case that he has neglected to maintain her and she has no sufficient means for sustainence in life. Whatever be the merits of her claim, the fact that she has filed a petition for maintenance against the husband and it is pending for consideration cannot be ignored. Learned counsel for the respondent has a case that a sum of Rs.2000/- per each children was sent in the previous month, but it was refused to be accepted. Whatever that be, it is a matter to be examined by the court where the maintenance claim is pending. From the facts presented, it appears that the cases pending between the parties are the proceedings initiated by the wife and both cases are pending at Family Court, Kollam which is situate 30 K.M. away from the place of residence of the husband and the transfer is requested to the Family Court, Nedumangad which is situate 45 K.M. away from his place of residence. In the aforesaid situation, I find no merit in the petitions. Both the petitions are dismissed. srd S.S. SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE