IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS THURSDAY, THE 1ST SEPTEMBER 2011 / 10TH BHADRA 1933 Tr.Appeal(C).No. 3 of 2011() ---------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN TPC.18/2011 Dated 06/04/2011 (OP.1226/2010 of FAMILY COURT, NEDUMANGAD) .................... APPELLANT (S): RESPONDENT: --------------------------------------------- BABU DANIEL , AGED 60 YEARS, S/O.M.C.DANIEL, PADINJATTEDATHU HOUSE, NALANCHIRA PO,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PRESENTLY WORKING AI ZAHARA PRINTING PRESS, P.B.NO.3412,P.C.NO.112 RUWI, SULTHANATE OF OMAN REP HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER SRI.P.R.BABY, AGED YEARS, S/O.V.V.RAJAN,K.R.A-1,ALUVILA, PUTHENVEEDU, NALANCHIRA PO. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 015. BY ADV. SRI.MOHAN JACOB GEORGE SMT.P.V.PARVATHI SMT.REENA THOMAS SRI.L.RAM MOHAN RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENT: ---------------------------------------------- JULIE PHILIPPOSE, AGED 39 YEARS, PENIAL PLAMKOOTTATHIL HOUSE, VECHOOCHIRA PO KANNAM MURI, CHETHAKKAL VILLAGE, RANNI TALUK PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. BY ADV.SMT.K.V.BHADRAKUMARI SMT.ANILA GEORGE. THIS TRANSFER APPEAL(CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/09/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.M.JOSEPH & M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. ----------------------------------------- Tr.Appeal No.3 of 2011 ----------------------------------------- Dated, this the Ist day of September, 2011 J U D G M E N T K.M.Joseph, J. This appeal is filed against the order of the learned Single Judge dated 6.4.2011 by which the learned Single Judge allowed the transfer petition filed by the respondent/wife of the petitioner and transferred O.P.No.1226/2010 which is pending before the Family Court, Nedumangad to the Family Court, Thiruvalla. It is not in dispute that the wife has filed O.P.No.656/2007 which is a petition for return of money and gold ornaments before the Family Court, Thiruvalla. She has also filed O.P.(Divorce) No.655/2007 before the Family Court, Thiruvalla for divorce. The appellant/husband also filed O.P.(G&W) No.1062/2010 before the Family Court, Thiruvalla. O.P.No.1226 of 2010 which has been transferred by the learned Single Judge was filed by the appellant for recovery of money and household articles. Following is the reasoning given by the learned Single Judge. “6. The petitioner is unemployed. She has to maintain two children. The respondent is employed abroad at Ruwi, Sulthanate of Oman. It does not matter much for the respondent whether the case is tried by the Family Court, Thiruvalla or the Family Court, Nedumangad. He TAC 3/2011 -2- has filed two cases; one before the Family Court, Nedumangad and the other before the Family Court, Thiruvalla. At any rate, the respondent has to appear before the Family Court, Thiruvalla to conduct the case filed by him and also to defend the two cases filed by the petitioner. Therefore, no prejudice would be caused if O.P.No.1226 of 2010 is transferred from the Family Court, Nedumangad to the Family Court, Thiruvalla. The petitioner belongs to Thiruvalla. It is stated that she would be put to great hardship if she is compelled to appear before the Family Court, Nedumangad.” The learned Single Judge also adverted to the decision of the Apex Court in Sumita Singh vs. Kumar Sanjay and another {2001 (10) SCC 41}, Rajwinder Kaur vs.Balwinder Singh {2003 (11) SCC 726} and Mangla Patil Kale vs. Sanjeev Kumar Kale {2003 (10) SCC 280} for the proposition that the inconvenience caused to the wife if no transfer is made should be taken note of. 2. We heard the learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the respondent. Learned counsel for the appellant would essentially point out that the appellant is working abroad. He would submit that the exparte decree was set aside in O.P.No.656/2007 on conditions being imposed on him and the matter was remanded back. Thereafter, the wife did not appear and the matter was dismissed for default. He would further TAC 3/2011 -3- submit that it is only to harass the appellant that the matter be disposed of when the appellant is not present. He would submit that what he is genuinely interested in is that all matters are disposed of early within a time limit. Learned counsel for the respondent, of course, would support the order and also have no objection in the matter being disposed of within a time limit. In the circumstance of the case while confirming the order we direct the Family Court, Thiruvalla to dispose of the four cases viz, O.P.No.656 of 2007, O.P.(Divorce) No.655 of 2007, O.P.(G&W) No.1062 of 2010 and O.P.No.1226 of 2010 on or before 30th June, 2012. (K.M.JOSEPH) JUDGE. (M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS) JUDGE. MS