IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN MONDAY, THE 14TH DECEMBER 2009 / 23RD AGRAHAYANA 1931 Tr.P(C).No. 315 of 2009() ------------------------- MC.322/2009 of FAMILY COURT, NEDUMANGAD .................... PETITIONER: ------------------------------ NIZABUDEEN, S/O.PAREEDKUNJU, AGED 47 YEARS, NEDIYAVILAPUTHEN VEEDU, VAZHOTTUKONAM, VATTIYOORKAVU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.N.R.SURESH KUMAR SRI.S.JIJI RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. SAJANA.N.J, AGED 16 YEARS, D/O.JEMEENSA BEEVI, PARUTIVILA VEEDU, THOPPUMUKKU, KODUNGANNOOR P.O., VATTIYOORKAVU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. MUHAMMED MYTHEEN, PARUTIVILA VEEDU, THOPPUMUKKU, KODUNGANNOOR P.O., VATTIYOORKAVU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ADV. SRI.G.SUDHEER FOR R2 THIS TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/12/2009 ALONG WITH TPC.NO.319 OF 2009 , THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ORDER IN I.A.NO.3274/2009 IN TR.P.(C).NO.315/2009 DISMISSED. 14.12.2009 S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J. ------------------------------- Tr.P.(C).NOS.315 & 319 OF 2009 () ----------------------------------- Dated this the 14th day of December, 2009 O R D E R Both the transfer petitions are filed under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Petitioner seeks transfer of two petitions filed by his daughter seeking maintenance from the Family Court, Nedumangad to the Family Court, Thiruvananthapuram. The 1st respondent is the daughter of the petitioner and the 2nd respondent her maternal grand father and next friend in the proceedings for maintenance. The 1st respondent has filed M.C.No.322 of 2009 claiming maintenance from the petitioner father and O.P.No.1197 of 2009 for past maintenance and reimbursement of the pension benefits of her late mother, as her legal heir, which is stated to have been collected by the petitioner suppressing his second marriage. Both the above petitions for maintenance and claim as aforesaid are pending before the Family Court, Nedumangad. Petitioner is an employee in the Corporation of TPC.315 & 319/09 2 Thiruvananthapuram and he seeks transfer of the petitions to the Family Court, Thiruvananthapuram. 2. Notice given, the respondents have entered appearance. I heard the counsel on both sides. From the submissions made and taking note of the facts and circumstances presented, it is seen the parties are residing at Vattiyoorkavu within the jurisdiction of the Family Court, Nedumangad. No satisfactory ground has been made out by the petitioner/father to sustain the request made for transfer of the claim petitions moved by his daughter before the competent court having jurisdiction to entertain such proceedings. Petitioner is employed at Thiruvananthapuram cannot be given unmerited consideration where it is seen the claim for maintenance has been made by a minor daughter represented by a next friend. More concern should be given for the convenience of the minor daughter in the prosecution than that of the father who is imputed of collecting the pensionary benefits of his late wife, the mother of the claimant, suppressing his second marriage. Considering the TPC.315 & 319/09 3 totality of the facts and circumstances presented, I find there is no merit in the transfer petition. Both petitions are dismissed. S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN JUDGE prp