IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH THURSDAY, THE 20TH MAY 2010 / 30TH VAISAKHA 1932 TR.P(C).NO. 36 OF 2010() ------------------------------------ OP.842/2009 OF FAMILY COURT, NEDUMANGAD .................... PETITIONERS: -------------------- 1. SURENDRANATHAN, S/O.KRISHNAN, LATHA NIVAS, THOTTINKARA DESOM, VAKKOM VILLAGE, CHIRAYINKEEZHU. 2. SHYAM KRISHNAN LAL, S/O.SHYAMLAL, DO. DO. DO. MINOR, REPRESENTED BY GRAND FATHER AND NEXT FRIEND SURENDRANATHAN, DO. DO. DO. 3. SYAMSREE, D/O.SHYAMLAL, DO. DO. DO. MINOR, REPRESENTED BY GRAND FATHER AND NEXT FRIEND SURENDRANATHAN, DO. DO. DO. BY ADV. SRI.LATHEESH SEBASTIAN RESPONDENT(S): ----------------------- SHYAMLAL, S/O.GOVINDAN, SHYAMALAYAM, ARYANAD VILLAGE, NEDUMANGAD TALUK. ADV. SRI.V.G.ARUN SRI.T.R.HARIKUMAR THIS TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P.JOSEPH, J. ==================================== Tr.P(C) No.36 of 2010 ==================================== Dated this the 20th day of May, 2010 O R D E R This petition is filed for transfer of O.P. No.842 of 2009 from the Family Court, Nedumangad to the Family Court, Kottarakkara. O.P. No.842 of 2009 is a petition filed by petitioners to declare petitioner No.1 as guardian of petitioner Nos.2 and 3 born to his daughter since deceased, in the respondent. Reason for transfer is that respondent is a staff of the Sub Court, Nedumangad and that the said court as well as the Family Court, Nedumangad are functioning in the same building. Petitioners are apprehensive of the result of the petition and hence requested for transfer. Prayer is opposed by learned counsel for the respondent. 2. To order transfer of the case the apprehension stated by the petitioners must be real and substantial. Mere fact that the Sub Court, Nedumangad where respondent is working is functioning in the same building where the Family Court of that station is functioning cannot affect the disposal of the case on merit. I am not satisfied that apprehension stated by the Tr.P(C) No.36 of 2010 -: 2 :- petitioners is either real or substantial. As such request for transfer cannot be entertained. Petition is dismissed for the above reason. THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE. vsv