ORDER

(Dated this the 21st day of December 2021)

The petitioner is the husband of the respondent. He prays for a transfer of O.P. No.629 of 2018 and O.P. No.385 of 2018 pending before the Family Court, Kottarakkara. O.P. No.629 of 2018 was filed by the respondent/wife, through her power of attorney holder, her father, for a decree of divorce.

2. The respondent also filed O.P. No.385 of 2018 for recovery of money from the husband, which is pending before the Family Court, Kottarakkara. The respondent is employed in United States of America and she is represented by her power attorney holder, her father, aged

68 years.

3. The counsel for the respondent submitted that the transfer petition is filed with ulterior motive and the husband being aged 35 years and residing at Kozhenchery can very well attend the case at Kottarakkara and that the transfer of the case from Family Court, Kottarakkara to the Family Court, Pathanamthitta will cause hardship to the power of attorney holder of the respondent, aged 68 years. The petitioner/husband does not have any valid ground for transferring the case. His only ground is that it is very difficult for the petitioner to travel to such a long distance on all posting dates in both the cases, wherein the respondent is represented through a single person namely father of the respondent/wife.

4. It is true that there was another case, namely G.O.P.No.1187 of 2014 filed under Sections 9 and 25 of the Guardian and Wards Act in respect of the minor child before the Family Court, Pathanamthitta. But the said case was compromised as per Annexure A2 order dated 1.12.2014 on the basis of the settlement arrived at by the parties and hence, there was no occasion for the respondent herein to appear before the Family Court, Pathanamthitta for conducting the above mentioned cases. When a Transfer Petition is being considered under Section 24 of the CPC, comparative hardship has to be looked into.

Admittedly, the petitioner is aged 35 years, whereas the power of attorney holder of the respondent is aged 68 years, a senior citizen. For conducting the cases before the Family Court, Pathanamthitta, the respondent has to travel to and fro. Even if the cases are transferred to the Family Court, Pathanamthitta, the petitioner has to travel from Kozhancherry to Pathanamthitta. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to allow these Transfer Petitions as the comparative hardship of the respondent is more.

In the result, these Transfer Petitions are dismissed.

SD/

BASANT BALAJI, JUDGE dl/

21510000099201