SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Online)(KER) 30926

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS WEDNESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 11TH JYAISHTA, 1944 TR.P(C) NO. 609 OF 2021 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN OP 154/2021 OF FAMILY COURT, ETTUMANOOR PETITIONER:

REMYA MAHTEW @ REMYA WILSON, AGED 36 YEARS D/O.MATHEW, THARAPPIL HOUSE, PIRAVOM P.O., KAKKAD, PIRAVOM VILLAGE, MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-686 664.

BY ADV BIJU ABRAHAM RESPONDENT:

WILSON JOSE,S/O JOSE AGED 46 YEARS S/O.JOSE, THARAPPIL HOUSE, NJEEZHOOR KARA, NJEEZHOOR VILLAGE, VAIKOM TALUK, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT-686 612.

THIS TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER

This transfer petitions is filed under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, seeking to transfer O.P No.154 of 2021(Annexure-I) from the Family Court, Ettumannoor to the Family Court, Muvattupuzha.

2. The petitioner’s case, in brief, in the memorandum of transfer petition is that; she is the wife of the respondent. She has filed O.P No.665/2021 and MC No.90/2021 before the Family Court, Muvattupuzha, seeking a decree for return of money and also for maintenance of her child, respectively. The respondent has also filed G.O.P. No.556/2021 before the same court, for the custody of the child. It is during the pendency of the above proceedings, that the respondent has now filed Annexure 1 before the Family Court, Ettumanoor. The respondent is appearing before the Family Court, Muvattupuza to contest the above proceedings pending before the Family Court, Muvattupuzha. It is only to harass the petitioner, that the respondent has now filed Annexure I. There is no person to chaperone the petitioner and the child from Muvattupuzha to Ettumanoor. Hence, the transfer petition.

3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Even though notice was served on the respondent, there is no appearance for him.

4 The law with respect to transfer of proceedings, particularly matrimonial disputes, is no longer res-integra, in view of the categoric declaration of law by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sumitha Sing V. Kumar Sanjay and another [(2001)10 SCC 41)], Mona Aresh Goel V. Aresh Satya Goel [(2000) 9 SCC 255], Vaishali Shridhar Jagtap V. Shridhar Vishwanath Jagtap [AIR 2016 SC 3584] and Santhini V. Vijaya Venkatesh [2017 (4) KLT 415 (SC)]. The Honourable Supreme Court has held that it is the convenience of the woman and children that has to be looked into, while ordering the transfer of a case from one Court to another.

5. In the light of the uncontroverted averments in the transfer petition, that connected cases between the parties are already pending before the Family Court, Muvattupuzha, and the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the aforecited decisions, I am inclined to exercise the discretionary powers of this Court under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

In the result, I allow the transfer petition by ordering the transfer of O.P.No.154/2021 from the Family Court, Ettumanoor to the Family Court, Muvattupuzha. The parties would be at liberty to seek for the consolidation and joint trial of all the proceedings. The Registry shall forward a copy of this judgment to the Family Court, Ettumanoor with instructions to forthwith transmit the records in the above case to the Family Court, Muvattupuzha. The Family Court, Muvattupuzha shall, immediately on receipt of the records in the above case, post the case along with the connected cases.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top