IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH MONDAY, THE 11TH JULY 2011 / 20TH ASHADHA 1933 Tr.P(C).No. 140 of 2011() ------------------------- OP.199/2011 of FAMILY COURT, THIRUVALLA TO FAMILY COURT,MALAPPURAM .................... PETITIONER/RESPONDENT IN OP: --------------------------------------------------- PREETHY, D/O.KESAVAN, AGED 37 YEARS, POORANGATTIL HOUSE, AMARAMBALAM P.O., POOKKOTTUM PADAM, NILAMBUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.K.M.JAMALUDHEEN, SMT.LATHA PRABHAKARAN. RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER IN OP: --------------------------------------------------------- SANTHOSH KUMAR.A.R, SREENANDANAM HOUSE, PARAKKODE POST, ADOOR, PATHANAMTHITTA-685 002. BY ADVS. SRI. K.SHAJ, SRI.SAJJU.S. THIS TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss Tr.P(C)NO.140/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES: ANNEX.A: COPY OF THE O.P.199/11 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT BEFORE FAMILY COURT, THIRUVALLA. ANNEX.B: COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED UNDER FORM NO.1 IN O.P.199/11. ANNEX.C: COPY OF O.P.58/10 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, MALAPPURAM. ANNEX.D: COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE FAMILY COURT, MALAPPURAM IN O.P.58/2010 DTD. 08/06/2010 ALONG WITH THE JOINT STATEMENT. RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES: N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.S.TO JUDGE Kss THOMAS P.JOSEPH, J. ==================================== Tr.P(C) No.140 of 2011 ==================================== Dated this the 11th day of July, 2011 O R D E R Petitioner seeks transfer of O.P. No.199 of 2011 from Family Court, Thiruvalla to Family Court, Malappuram. That is a petition filed by the respondent-husband for restitution of conjugal rights. Petitioner-wife states that she is a permanent resident of Pookkottumpadam, in Nilambur Taluk, Malapuram District which is far way from Thiruvalla. It is stated that petitioner has a five year old child to look after. It is also stated that it is difficult for her to travel all the distance from Nilambur to Thiruvlla. 2. Petition is opposed by the respondent. It is contended that there is no reason to transfer the case and that if the case is transferred respondent has to travel long distance from Parakkode, near Adoor to Malappuram. 3. The Supreme Court in Sumitha Singh v. Kumar Sanjay and another (AIR 2002 SC 396) and Arti Rani v. Dharmendra Kumar Gupta ([2008] 9 SCC 353) has stated that while considering request for transfer of matrimonial proceedings convenience of the wife has to be looked into. That of course Tr.P(C) No.140 of 2011 -: 2 :- does not mean that inconvenience of the husband has to be ignored. Petitioner-wife is aged about 37 years and it is not disputed, she has to look after her five year old child. She has to travel all the distance from Nilambmur to Thiruvalla. Having regard to the circumstances stated I am inclined to think that the hardship is comparatively more on petitioner if transfer is not allowed. I must bear in mind that petitioner had earlier filed O.P. No.58 of 2010 in Family Court, Malappuram for custody of the child (which was later settled) and that case was being contested by the respondent in that court. The difficulty of respondent going to Family Court, Malappuram every now and then can be reduced to some extent by permitting him to appear in the transferee court through counsel except when his physical presence is required. Hence I am inclined to allow the request. Resultantly, this petition is allowed in the following lines: (a) O.P.No.199 of 2011 pending in Family Court, Thiruvalla is withdrawn from that court and made over to Family Court, Malappuram for trial and disposal. Tr.P(C) No.140 of 2011 -: 3 :- (b) The transferor court while transmitting records of the case to the transferee court shall fix the date for appearance of parties in the transferee court with due intimation to the counsel on both sides. (c) It is made clear that except when physical presence of respondent in the transferee court is necessary he can appear through counsel. THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE. vsv