Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH WEDNESDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF JANUARY 2013 10TH MAGHA 193 TR.P(C).NO. 2 OF 201.() ---------------------------------- G.O.P NO.1059 OF 2012.FAMILY COURT, KOLLAM PETITIONER(S)/PETITIONER: --------------------------------------- SONIA RAJAN AGED 3 YEARS D/O.B.S.RAJAN,R/A.'CHILANKA',TC 6/827 AAKKULAM ROAD,PULAYANARKOTTA,THIRUVIKKAL P.O. TRIVANDRUM-695031 BY ADVS.SRI.M.B.SANDEEP SMT.R.PRIYA SMT.B.DHANYA RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- PRAVEEN KUMAR S/O.REGHU KUMAR,HOUSE NO 88,JAGATHI SANKAER NAGAR,CHINNAKKADA,KOLLAM PIN-691001 RR1 BY ADV. SRI.S.ABHILASH RR1 BY ADV. SMT.CHITHRA.S.BABU THIS TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 30-01-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: TR.P(C) NO.2 OF 201.APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS: ANNEXURE-A1 TRUE COPY OF M.C. NO.3 OF 2012.PENDING ON THE FILES OF THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ANNEXURE-A2 TRUE COPY OF O.P. NO.1582 OF 2012.PENDING ON THE FILES OF FAMILY COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. ANNEXURE-A3 TRUE COPY OF G.O.P NO.1059 OF 201.PENDING ON THE FILES OF THE FAMILY COURT, KOLLAM. ANNEXURE-A4 TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT CARD OF NIHARIKA PRAVEEN RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: NIL TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE THOMAS P.JOSEPH, J.
==================================== Tr.P(C) No.2 of 2013 ==================================== Dated this the 30th day of January, 2013 ORDER
Respondent appears through counsel.
2. This petition is filed by the wife seeking transfer of G.O.P. No.1059 of 2012 from the Family Court, Kollam to the Family Court, Thiruvananthapuram.
3. That is a petition filed by the respondent for custody of the child. Petitioner, aged 34 years is residing at Pulayanarkotta in Trivandrum city while the respondent is residing at Chinnakkada, in Kollam Town.
4. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that apart from the difficulties of petitioner in travelling all the distance to Kollam with the child, O.P. No.1582 of 2012 filed by the petitioner is pending in the Family Court, Thiruvananthapuram and M.C. No.3 of 2012 filed by her is pending in the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Thiruvananthapuram.
5. The Supreme Court in Sumitha Singh v. Kumar Sanjay and another (AIR 200.SC
396) and Arti Rani v. Tr.P(C) No.2 of 2013 -:
2. :- Dharmendra Kumar Gupta ([2008] 9 SCC
353) has held that while considering request for transfer of matrimonial proceedings, convenience of the wife has to be looked into. That of course does not mean that inconvenience of the husband has to be ignored.
6. Having regard to the various factors I am of the view that comparative hardship is more on petitioner in case request for transfer is not allowed. The inconvenience that may be caused to the respondent can be reduced by permitting him to appear in the transferee court through counsel except when his physical presence is required. Moreover it is appropriate that cases pending in the two Family Courts are tried and disposed of by the same court. Hence I am inclined to allow the petition. Resultantly, the Petition is allowed in the following lines: (a) G.O.P. No.1059 of 2012 pending in the Family Court, Kollam is withdrawn from that court and made over to the Family Court, Thiruvananthapuram for trial and disposal. (b) The transferor court while transmitting records of the cases to the transferee court shall Tr.P(C) No.2 of 2013 -:
3. :- fix date for appearance of parties in the transferee court with due intimation to the counsel on both sides. (c) The Family Court, Thiruvananthapuram shall post G.O.P. No.1059 of 2012 (being transferred to it) and O.P. No.1582 of 2012 (pending in that court) as far as possible on the same dates. (d) It is made clear that except when physical presence of the respondent in the transferee court is necessary, he can appear through counsel. All pending interlocutory applications will stand dismissed. THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE. vsv