IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH WEDNESDAY, THE 8TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 17TH BHADRA 1932 TR.P(C).NO. 137 OF 2010() ------------------------------------- OP.145/2010 OF FAMILY COURT, PALAKKAD .................... PETITIONER: ------------------- SALINI, D/O. RAVUNNIKKUTTY @ RAMU, OATTUPARA VEEDU, P.O.PANNIYAMKURISSI, CHERPULASSERY, OTTAPPALAM TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU SMT.M.M.DEEPA RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- UNNIKRISHNAN, S/O. PUTHUSSERY VEETTIL BALAKRISHNA PANICKER, 'CHANDRA BHAVAN', CHERPULASSERY AMSOM DESOM, CHERPULASSERY VILLAGE, OTTAPPALAM TALUK. ADV. SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR) THIS TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P.JOSEPH, J. ==================================== Tr.P(C) No.137 of 2010 ==================================== Dated this the 08th day of September, 2010 O R D E R This petition is filed by the wife for transfer of O.P. No.145 of 2010 from Family Court, Palakkad to Family Court, Thrissur. That is a petition filed by the respondent for return of money and other reliefs. Petitioner-wife has filed O.P. No.155 of 2010 in the same court for return of gold ornaments but that happened to be dismissed by the learned Judge taking the view that petitioner had withdrawn Rs.2.60 lakhs from the account of respondent and hence she is not entitled to the reliefs prayed for. Apprehension of petitioner is that in the light of that decision, Family Court, Palakkad may not decide O.P.No.145 of 2010 independently of the decision in O.P.No.155 of 2010. Learned counsel for respondent states that there is no ground for transfer, parties are residing at Cherplsssary and the distance to Palakkad and Thrissur from that place is almost the same. 2. The only ground alleged for transfer before me is that Family Court, Palakkad has already disposed of O.P. No.155 of 2010. If that decision has no bearing on the decision in Tr.P(C) No.137 of 2010 -: 2 :- O.P.No.145 of 2010 I do not find reason to think that the court will be influenced by that decision while deciding O.P.No.145 of 2010. That the same court has decided one case between the parties earlier is not by itself a ground to transfer the subsequent case. I do not find reason to order transfer. Petition is dismissed. THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE. vsv