IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH MONDAY, THE 19TH SEPTEMBER 2011 / 28TH BHADRA 1933 Tr.P(C).No. 226 of 2011() ------------------------------------ O.P. NO.525/2009 OF FAMILY COURT, ALAPPUZHA TO THE FAMILY COURT, KOLLAM. .................... PETITIONER/RESPONDENT ----------------------------------------- NAJUMUNNISSA, AGED 24, D/O.IQBAL, NAJIMA MANZIL, MARUTHOORKULANGARA SOUTH MURI, KARUNAGAPPALLY VILLAGE, KARUNAGAPPALLY. BY ADV. SRI.R.BINDU (SASTHAMANGALAM) RESPONDENT/PETITIONER ----------------------------------------- RIFAJ, S/O.BADARUDDEENKUNJU, REHMATHULLA MANZIL, KARUVATTA NORTH MURI P.O., KARUVATTA VILLAGE, ALAPPUZHA-690 517. BY ADV. SRI.T.MADHU, SRI.B.K.RAJAGOPAL. THIS TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/09/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: rs Tr.P(C).No. 226 of 2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES: ANNEXURE 1: COPY OF THE PETITION IN O.P. NO. 525/2009 ON THE FILES OF THE FAMILY COURT, ALAPPUZHA. ANNEXURE II: COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN O.P. NO. 525/2009 ON THE FILES OF THE FAMILY COURT, ALAPPUZHA. RESPONDENTS ANNEXURES: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE rs THOMAS P JOSEPH, J. ---------------------------------------- Tr.P(C).No.226 of 2011 --------------------------------------- Dated this 19th day of September, 2011 ORDER Petitioner/wife is the respondent in O.P.No.525 of 2009 of Family Court, Alappuzha. That is a petition for partition filed by the respondent/husband. Petitioner who is residing at Maruthoorkulangara South Muri, near Karunagappally requests to transfer the case to the Family Court, Kollam considering the long distance she has to travel to contest the case at Alappuzha. 2. Petition is opposed by the respondent/husband. Learned counsel submitted that proof affidavit of respondent/husband has already been filed on 31.08.2011 in the Family Court, Alappuzha and that the suit itself could be disposed of immediately. It is also contended that to go to Alappuzha, petitioner need only travel an extra distance of around 20kms. 3. The Supreme Court in Sumitha Singh Vs. Sanjay Kumar & Another (AIR 2002 SC 396) and Arti Rani Lrs. Pinki Devi and Another Vs. Darmendra Kumar Gupta (2008 (9) SCC 353) has stated that while considering the request for transfer in matrimonial proceedings convenience of the wife has to be looked into. This being a petition for partition, if the petition Tr.P(C).No.226 of 2011 -: 2 :- is decided in favour of respondent matters will not end there – the preliminary decree will be followed by an application for passing a final decree in which several proceedings including appointment of Advocate Commissioner have to be taken. After the final decree is passed the process of execution will start. That means, even if the petition is disposed of as claimed by the respondent, petitioner will have to continue attending the Family Court, Alappuzha if the petition is decreed until execution is completed. In other words, even as submitted by the learned counsel for respondent if the petition is decreed, petitioner will have to attend Family Court, Alappuzha several times each times petitioner travelling an extra distance of 20kms. According to the learned counsel for petitioner, petitioner has to travel an extra distance of 20kms. Petitioner is aged about 24 years. Necessarily she has to be accompanied by somebody which involves expenses also. 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. Hence I am inclined to allow the request. Learned counsel for respondent has raised an apprehension that if the case is transferred to the Family Court, Kollam the transferee Court Tr.P(C).No.226 of 2011 -: 3 :- would assign a new number of the year, 2011 though the case is filed in the year 2009 and that may prolong the case further. That apprehension of petitioner may be allayed by directing the transferee Court to dispose of the petition as early as possible notwithstanding that the suit will be given a new number of the year 2011. Resultantly this petition is allowed as follows: (i) O.P.No.525 of 2009 pending in the Family Court, Alappuzha is withdrawn from that court and made over to the Family Court, Kollam. (ii) The transferor court shall transmit records of the case to the transferee court with due intimation to the counsel on both sides as to the date of appearance in the transferee court. (iii) The transferee Court, notwithstanding that a new number may be assigned to the case is directed to dispose of the petition as early as possible having regard to the fact that the petition was filed in the year, 2009 and the respondent has already filed proof affidavit in the case. (THOMAS P JOSEPH, JUDGE) Sbna/-