IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH TUESDAY, THE 18TH OCTOBER 2011 / 26TH ASWINA 1933 Tr.P(C).No. 141 of 2011() --------------------------------- OP.184/2009 of FAMILY COURT, KOTTARAKKARA .................... PETITIONER ------------------ SHEENA BEEGOM, D/O.SAFEERA BEEVI, NOW RESIDING AT C.P. HOUSE, THAZHNNAMALA, CHITTIMANOOR P.O., ANAD VILLAGE, NEDUMANGAD. BY ADV. SRI.P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------------- 1. SHAMNAD, S/O.ABUBACKER KUNJU, NOUSHAD MANZIL, VENKOLLA, KULATHUPPUZHA P.O., KOLLAM-691 310. 2. ABUBACKER KUNJU, RESIDING AT NOUSHAD MANZIL, VENKOLLA, KULATHUPPUZHA P.O., KOLLAM-691 310. 3. JAMEELA BEEVI, W/O.ABUBACKER, NOUSHAD MANZIL, VENKOLLA, KULATHUPPUZHA P.O., KOLLAM-691 310. 4. NOUSHAD, S/O.ABUBACKER KUNJU, NOUSHAD MANZIL, VENKOLLA, KULATHUPPUZHA P.O., KOLLAM-691 310. R2 & R3 BY ADV. SRI.SAJU.S.A . THIS TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: rs Tr.P(C).No. 141 of 2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES:- ANNEXURE A: COPY OF THE ORIGINAL PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER AS O.P. NO. 184/2009 PENDING BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, KOTTARAKKARA. RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES:- NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE rs THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- Tr.P.(C) No.141 of 2011 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 18th th day of October, 2011. ORDER This petition is filed by the wife requesting to transfer O.P.No.184 of 2009 from Family Court, Kottarakkara to Family Court, Nedumangad. That is a petition filed by the petitioner at a time when she was staying at Kottarakkara seeking recovery of money and gold ornaments. It is stated that petitioner is staying at Chittimanoor, near Nedumangad and that she has to travel the long distance from her place of residence to Kottarakkara . Hence the request for transfer. 2. Learned counsel submits that transfer of the case will be convenient to the respondents also since they are residing at Kulathuppuzha, in Kollam District and that the distance from Kulathuppuzha to Nedumangad is 35 kms. while, to Kottarakkara it is 60 kms. 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. True that does not mean that inconvenience if any of the opposite party need not be considered. 4. Though petitioner filed O.P.No.184 of 2009 in the Family Court, Kottarakkara, that was at a time when she was staying at Kottarakkara. Now she is staying at Nedumangad. She has to travel the long distance from her Tr.P(C)No.141/2011 2 place of residence to Kottarakkara. She may have to be accompanied by somebody which involves expense. Having regard to the circumstances stated above, I am inclined to think that comparative hardship is more on petitioner if the request for transfer is not allowed. The inconvenience that may be caused to the respondents could be reduced by directing that they need appear in the transferee court only when their physical presence is required. I am inclined to allow the request for transfer. Resultantly this petition is allowed as follows: (i) O.P.No.184 of 2009 pending in the Family Court, Kottarakkara is withdrawn from that court and transferred to the Family Court, Nedumangad 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) Respondents can appear in the transferee court through counsel except when their physical presence is required. I.A.No.1061 of 2011 will stand dismissed. THOMAS P.JOSEPH, Judge. cks