IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH THURSDAY, THE 23RD SEPTEMBER 2010 / 1ST ASWINA 1932 Tr.P(C).No. 259 of 2010() ------------------------- OPHMA.643/2010 of FAMILY COURT, KOTTAYAM .................... PETITIONER/RESPONDENT: ------------------------------ SMITHA B, AGED 29 YEARS D/O.BHASKARAN NAIR, KANNATTU HOUSE MALAYIDAOM THURUTHU KARA KUNNATHUNADU TALUK, KIZHAKKAMBALAM VILLAGE ERNAKULAM DISTRICT BY ADV. SRI.K.N.ANIL KUMAR RESPONDENT/PETITIONER: --------------- SAJIKUMAR, S/O.KRISHNA KURUP PARUTHIKKATT HOUSE, THURUTHI KARA, CHANGANASSERY KOTTAYAM DISTRICT 686 101 ADV. SRI.JOHN VARGHESE SRI.P.M.JOSEPH FOR R THIS TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P JOSEPH, J. ---------------------------------------- Tr.P.C.No.259 of 2010 --------------------------------------- Dated this 23rd day of September, 2010 ORDER This petition is filed by petitioner/wife seeking transfer of O.P(HMA).No.643 of 2010 from Family Court, Kottayam at Ettumanoor to Family Court, Ernakulam. It is stated that the wife is aged 29 years residing with her aged parents in Kunnathunadu Taluk in Kizhakkambalam village in Ernakulam district. She has to travel a long distance to reach Family Court, Kottayam at Ettumanoor. Petition is opposed by the respondent. It is contended that petitioner can very well come to Ettumanoor which is not far away from her place of residence. 2. Petitioner is a resident of Kizhakkambalam Village in Ernakulam district. That place is nearer to Ernakulam than Ettumanoor. If the case continues at Ettumanoor petitioner has to travel longer distance. She may have to be accompanied by some relative which involves expense also. The Supreme Court in Sumitha Singh Vs. Sanjay Kumar & Another (AIR 2002 SC 396) and Arti Rani Lrs. Pinki Devi and Another Vs. Darmendra Kumar Gupta (2008(9) SCC 353) has stated that while considering request for transfer in matrimonial Tr.P.C.No.259 of 2010 : 2 : proceedings convenience of the wife has to be looked into. I am inclined to think that comparative hardship is more on petitioner if transfer requested for is not allowed than the hardship respondent may have to suffer if transfer is allowed. Hence I am inclined to allow the petition. Resultantly this petition is allowed in the following lines: (i) O.P(HMA).No.643 of 2010 pending in Family Court, Kottayam, at Ettumanoor is withdrawn from the court and made over to Family court, Ernakulam. (ii) The transferor court shall transmit records of the case to the transferee court with due intimation to the counsel on both sides as to the date of appearance of parties in the transferee court. (THOMAS P JOSEPH, JUDGE) Sbna/-