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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 16743

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN, J
SAHILA.P – Appellant
Versus
HASSAN V.M., RAMEENA V.A – Respondent
TR.P(C) NO. 48 OF 2026 | O.P.No.1948/2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.R.SREEHARI, SHRI.HAMZA A.V.
For the Respondents: SRI.ARUN ASHOK, SMT.NEENA JAMES, SMT.CELIA ISAAC, SHRI.ANTONY M. GEORGE, SHRI.JOEL C JEXON

Transfer of custody case granted for convenience under Guardians and Wards Act.

Headnote:The petitioner seeks transfer of O.P.No.1948/2025 pending before the Family Court, Palakkad to Family Court, Ottapalam, citing difficulties in travel and convenience for all parties under Guardians and Wards Act, 1890. The respondents do not object to the transfer request, ensuring that existing rights are maintained. The Court allows the transfer noting the circumstances and sets the appearance date for further proceedings.

Table of Content
1. transfer of custody case for convenience. (Para 1 , 2)
2. no objection from respondents regarding transfer. (Para 3 , 4)
3. court allows the transfer. (Para 5)

ORDER

The petitioner is the wife of Muhammed Suhail.V and the respondents are her parents-in-law. The petitioner seeks for transfer of O.P.No.1948/2025 pending on the files of the Family Court, Palakkad to Family Court, Ottapalam. The original petition is filed by the respondents under the provisions of the Guardians and Wards Act ,1890 with respect to the custody of the minor child of the petitioner.

2. The petitioner has filed M.C.No.67/

2025 before the Family Court, Ottapalam for maintenance. The petitioner submits that the minor child is residing with her at Ottapalam, which is within the jurisdiction of the Family Court, Ottapalam and it is difficult for her to travel to the Family Court, Palakkad to contest the case. It is further submitted that it will be convenient for the respondents also to prosecute the case if it is transferred to Family Court, Ottapalam.

3. Heard Sri.R.Sreehari, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.Arun Ashok, the learned counsel for the respondents.

4. The learned counsel for the respondents submits that the respondents have no objection in transferring O.P.No.1948/2025 to the Family Court, Ottapalam. However, the relief granted by the Family Court, Palakkad to the respondents to interact with the child shall not be interefered with.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I feel that the request of the petitioner for transfer can be allowed.

In the result, the Tr.P.C. is allowed.

O.P.No.1948/2025, pending on the files of the Family Court, Palakkad will stand withdrawn and transferred to the Family Court, Ottapalam. The parties shall appear before the Family Court, Ottapalam at 11.00 a.m. on 01.04.2026. It will be open to the Family Court, Ottapalam to fix the date of interaction of the respondents with the child on the said date.

Sd/-

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
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top