IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH MONDAY, THE 14TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 23RD KARTHIKA 1933 Tr.P(C).No. 343 of 2011() ------------------------------------- OP(HMA)NO.1315/2011 of FAMILY COURT,TRIVANDRUM .................... PETITIONER ---------------------- SEEMA CHANDRAN, D/O. CHANDRAN, AGED 29 YEARS, RESIDING AT PALAKKIL KALIYATH HOUSE, ODAYAMMADAM, CHERUKUNNU P.O., KANNUR TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT-670 301. BY ADV. SRI.R.SURENDRAN RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- VINU B.KRISHNAN, S/O. BALAKRISHNA PILLAI, AGED 38 YEARS, ENGINEER, RESIDING AT PANCHAJANYAM, TC. NO.29/1063, AMBA GARDENS, PALKULANGARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 024. BY ADV. SRI.R.SUDHEESHKUMAR SRI.SUNIL KUMAR A.G THIS TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: sts THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- Tr.P.(C) No.343 of 2011 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 14th day of November, 2011. ORDER This petition is filed by the wife seeking transfer of O.P.(HMA) No.1315 of 2011 from the Family Court, Thiruvananthapuram to the Family Court, Kozhikode or to any other Family Court nearby for trial and disposal. It is stated that petitioner, aged about 29 years is residing at Cherukunnu, in Kannur Taluk and that she has to travel a long distance to reach Thiruvananthapuram to contest the case. It is also stated that there is nobody to accompany her since her parents are aged and ailing. Petitioner has acquaintance with Kozhikode since she was a student at Kozhikode and hence the request for transfer. 2. Petition is opposed by the respondent-husband. It is stated that petitioner was studying at Ernakulam and if so, she has acquaintance with Ernakulam also. It is contended that since the prayer in the petition is to transfer the case to the Family Court, Kozhikode or to any other Family Court nearby, the case could be transferred to the Family Court, Thrissur or Ernakulam. According to the learned counsel, respondent is preparing to go abroad and transfer of the case to the Family Court, Kozhikode will cause much inconvenience to him. Tr.P(C)No.343/2011 2 3. Petitioner is presently staying in Kannur Taluk, it is not disputed. She has to travel more than 500 kms. from her place of residence to Thiruvananthapuram to contest the case. She is aged about 29 years. Somebody has to accompany her which involves huge expense. 4. 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. Having regard to the circumstances stated I am inclined to think that comparative hardship is more on petitioner if the request for transfer is not allowed. If the case is transferred to Kannur, inconvenience of the respondent will be more. Petitioner is satisfied if the case is transferred to Kozhikode. Having regard to all the relevant circumstances I am inclined to allow the request for transfer of the case to the Family Court, Kozhikode. The inconvenience that may be caused to the respondent could be reduced by directing that he could appear in the transferee court through counsel except when his physical presence is required. Resultantly this petition is allowed as follows: (i) O.P.(HMA) No.1315 of 2011 pending in the Family Tr.P(C)No.343/2011 3 Court, Thiruvananthapuram is withdrawn from that court and transferred to the Family Court, Kozhikode 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) Respondent can appear in the transferee court through counsel except when his physical presence is required. I.A.No.2311 of 2011 will stand dismissed. THOMAS P.JOSEPH, Judge. cks