IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN THURSDAY, THE 3RD FEBRUARY 2011 / 14TH MAGHA 1932 Tr.P(C).No. 374 of 2010() ------------------------- OP.970/2010 of FAMILY COURT,THRISSUR .................... PETITIONER/RESPONDENT: ------------------------------------------ SUBHASREE, AGED 33 YEARS, D/O.T.K.SHREEDHARAN, T.C.43/598, AMRITHAVARSHINI, NAMBI GARDENS, KAMALESWARAM, MANACAUD P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.A.PRABHU RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER: -------------------------- K.B.SASI, AGED 42 YEARS, S/O.BALAKRISHNAN, KARYATTUKARA HOUSE, ELTHURUTH P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT. THIS TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ---------------------------------- Tr.P.(C).No.374 of 2010 ----------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of February, 2011 O R D E R The respondent filed O.P.No.970 of 2010 on the file of the Family Court, Thrissur, against the petitioner for divorce. The prayer in this Transfer Petition is to transfer O.P.No.970 of 2010 from the Family Court, Thrissur to the Family Court, Thiruvananthapuram. 2. The marriage between the petitioner and the respondent took place at Thrissur within the jurisdiction of the Family Court, Thrissur. The petitioner is residing at Thiruvananthapuram. The respondent belongs to Thrissur District. It is stated that the respondent is working in Bangalore. The petitioner has no job. Two children were born in the wedlock. The elder one is studying in IVth standard. The second child is not admitted to school. It is Tr.P.(C) No.374/2010 2 stated that the father of the petitioner is suffering from parkinsons disease. The petitioner states that if the case is tried before the Family Court, Thrissur, she would be put to irreparable injury and great hardship. 3. The Supreme 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) held that the inconvenience caused to the wife, if no transfer is made, should be taken note of. 4. Taking into account the circumstances mentioned above and also taking note of the fact that it does not matter for the respondent whether the case is tried at Thrissur or Thiruvananthapuram since he is working in Bangalore, I am of the view that it is only just and proper to allow the Transfer Petition. Accordingly, O.P.No.970 of 2010 pending before the Tr.P.(C) No.374/2010 3 Family Court, Thrissur shall stand transferred to Family Court, Thiruvananthapuram. The Family Court, Thrissur shall transmit the records to Family Court, Thiruvananthapuram. The Transfer Petition is allowed as above. K.T.SANKARAN JUDGE csl