IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 27TH MAGHA 1932 Tr.P(C).No. 12 of 2010 TO TRANSFER OP.659/2009 OF FAMILY COURT, ALAPPUZHA TO FAMILY COURT, THRISSUR. PETITIONER: ------------------------------- VIJAYALEKSHMI, AGED 45 YEARS, D/O.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, MATHILIL VEETIL, BRAHMAKULAM MURI, CHAVAKKAD TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.C.A.CHACKO SMT.C.M.CHARISMA SRI.N.A.SHAFEEK SRI.M.S.UNNIKRISHNAN RESPONDENT: --------------- V.T.SASI, AGED 54 YEARS, S/O.THANKAPPAN NAIR, AISWARYA HOUSE, THALAVADI THEKKEMURIYIL, KUTTANAD TALUK, ALLEPPEY DISTRICT. THIS TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/02/2011, ALONG WITH TPC NO.13 OF 2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ Tr.P.(C).NOs.12 & 13 OF 2010 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 16th day of February, 2011 O R D E R In both these cases the wife of the respondent is the petitioner. There is no appearance for the respondent. 2. The respondent filed O.P.No.659 of 2009 on the file of the Family Court, Alappuzha, against the petitioner claiming a sum of `10 lakhs. That case is pending. Tr.P.C.No.12 of 2010 is filed by the petitioner praying to transfer O.P.No.659 of 2009 from the file of the Family Court, Alappuzha to the Family Court, Thrissur. 3. O.P.No.660 of 2009 is filed by the respondent before the Family Court, Alappuzha against the petitioner to declare the marriage as null and void. That case is also pending. The prayer made by the petitioner in Tr.P.C.No.13 of 2010 is to transfer O.P.No.660 of 2009 from the Family Court, Alappuzha to the Family Court, Thrissur. Tr.P.(C) NOS. 12 AND 13 OF 2010 :: 2 :: 4. The petitioner states that she is residing at Chavakkad in Thrissur District. The respondent was working abroad and he belongs to Kuttanad in Alappuzha District. There is nobody to accompany the petitioner to the Family Court, Alappuzha. If the cases are tried before the Family Court, Alappuzha, the petitioner would be put to great inconvenience and prejudice. 5. From the averments in O.P.No.659 of 2009 filed by the respondent, it is seen that before the marriage in 2004, he was working abroad for the last twenty years. 6. The Supreme Court in Sumitha Singh v. Kumar Sanjay and another (2001) 10 SCC 41), Mangla Patil Kale v. Sanjeev Kumar Kale ((2003) 10 SCC 280) and Rajwinder Kaur v. Balwinder Singh ((2003) 11 SCC 726) held that the inconvenience caused to the wife, if no transfer is made, should be taken note of. 7. Taking into account the comparative hardship of the parties if the cases are transferred or not transferred from the Family Court, Alappuzha to the Family Court, Thrissur, I am of the view that the Tr.P.(C) NOS. 12 AND 13 OF 2010 :: 3 :: hardship that would be caused to the petitioner would be greater than the hardship that would be caused to the respondent, if the cases are not transferred from the Family Court, Alappuzha to the Family Court, Thrissur. For the aforesaid reasons, the Transfer Petitions are allowed. O.P.Nos.659 of 2009 and 660 of 2009, pending before the Family Court, Alappuzha shall stand transferred to the Family Court, Thrissur. The Family Court, Alappuzha shall transmit the records of the aforesaid cases to the Family Court, Thrissur. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/