IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH MONDAY, THE 12TH DECEMBER 2011 / 21ST AGRAHAYANA 1933 Tr.P(C).No. 398 of 2011() ---------------------------------- OP(G&W) NO.1222/2011 OF THE FAMILY COURT, ALAPPUZHA TO THE FAMILY COURT, THIRUVALLA .................... PETITIONERS(S): ------------------------- 1. MANJUMOLE, D/O. SARASAMMA, GURUKULAM VEEDU, NANNADU MURI, THIRUVANVANDOOR VILLAGE, CHENGANNOOR TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT PIN-689109. 2. SIDDARTH, MINOR, AGED 5 YEARS, S/O. MANOJ AND MANJUMOLE,GURUKULAM VEEDU, NANNADU MURI,THIRUVANVANDOOR VILLAGE, CHENGANNOOR TALUK,ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-689109,REP. BY HIS NATURAL GUARDIAN AND MOTHER, THE 1ST PETITIONER. BY ADV. SRI.ABRAHAM MATHEW (VETTOOR) RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ M. MANOJ S/O. MADHAVAN, SIDDARTH BHAVAN, POOZHIKKADU MURI, KUDASANADU.P.O., PANDHALAM VILLAGE, ADOOR TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. PIN-689512. THIS TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12/12/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: SD TPC NO. 398/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS ANX.A1 A TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FILED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER IN OP NO. 1073 OF 2010 BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT THIRUVALLA DATED 08-11-2010. ANX.A2 A TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FILED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER AGAINST THE RESPONDENT M.C. NO. 255 OF 2010 BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT AT THIRUVALLA DATED 18-10-2010. ANX.A3 A TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FILED BY THE RESPONDENT OP (G&W) NO.1222 OF 2011 BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, ALAPPUZHA. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS NIL TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE SD THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- Tr.P.(C) No.398 of 2011 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 12th day of December, 2011. ORDER Respondent has not appeared in spite of service of notice. 2. This petition is filed by the wife and minor son seeking transfer of O.P.(G&W) No.1222 of 2011 from the Family Court, Alappuzha to the Family Court, Thiruvalla. That is a petition filed by the respondent-husband for custody of the minor child. 1st petitioner has filed O.P.No.1073 of 2010 in the Family Court, Thiruvalla for return of value of gold ornaments, etc. Petitioners have filed M.C.No.255 of 2010 for maintenance in the said court. Learned counsel states that petitioners are residing at Nannadu Muri, in Chengannur Taluk and that they have to travel a long distance to reach Alappuzha. Learned counsel submits that even for the respondent, the convenient court is Family Court, Thiruvalla since he is residing at Poozhikkadu Muri, in Adoor Taluk. It is argued that it is necessary and convenient that all the cases are disposed of by the same court. 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 held that while considering the request for transfer of matrimonial proceedings convenience of the wife has to be looked into. Tr.P(C)No.398/2011 2 4. Two proceedings initiated by petitioners are pending before the Family Court, Thiruvalla. It is appropriate that all the cases are decided by the same court. Convenience of petitioners require that the cases are decided by the Family Court, Thiruvalla. That does not appear be causing much inconvenience to the respondent going by the his address given in this proceeding. Having regard to the circumstances stated before me I am inclined to think that comparative hardship is more on petitioner if request for transfer is not allowed. The inconvenience that may be caused to the respondent could be reduced by directing that he could appear in the Family Court, Thiruvalla through counsel except when his physical presence is required. I am inclined to allow the request for transfer. Resultantly this petition is allowed as follows: (i) O.P.(G&W) No.1222 of 2011 pending in the Family Court, Alappuzha is withdrawn from that court and transferred to the Family Court, Thiruvalla for trial and disposal. (ii) 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 for both parties. (iii) The transferee court shall post the cases - O.P(G&W). No.1222 of 2011 (being transferred to that court) and O.P.No.1073 of 2010 and Tr.P(C)No.398/2011 3 M.C.No.255 of 2010 (pending in that court) as far as possible on the same dates. (iv) Respondent can appear in the transferee court through counsel except when his physical presence is required. I.A.No.2671 of 2011 will stand dismissed. THOMAS P.JOSEPH, Judge. cks