IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI WEDNESDAY, THE 5 TH DAY OF MARCH 2025 / 14TH PHALGUNA, 1946 TR.P.(C) NO.467 OF 2024 (AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN OP NO.312 OF 2023 OF FAMILY COURT, ALUVA)

PETITIONER/RESPONDENT:

SAINA JOSE, AGED 38 YEARS, D/O OUSEPH K M, KULA HOUSE, CHEVVOOR (P.O.), THRISSUR, PIN 680 027 –

BY ADV NIDHI BALACHANDRAN RESPONDENT/PETITIONER:

DENNY, AGED 44 YEARS, S/O OUSEPH @ AGUSTY, PONMATTAM HOUSE, ATHIRAPPALLY ESTATE, BLOCK 16, KALADI PLANTATION, NOW RESIDING AT VADAKKUMBHAGAM KARA, MANJAPRA VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM, PIN 680 027 –

BY ADVS.

P.M.ARUN DAS BIBIN VARGHESE(K/253/2013)

THIS TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON

12.07.2024, THE COURT ON 05.03.2025 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER (Dated: 5^th March, 2025)

The petitioner is the wife. The respondent filed O.P.No.2007 of

2021 before the Family Court, Ernakulam, claiming divorce from the petitioner. The same got transferred to Family Court, Aluva, and re-

numbered as O.P.No.312 of 2023.

2. The petitioner filed O.P.No.1067 of 2022 before the Family Court, Thrissur. She also filed O.P.No.1064 of 2022 for restitution of Conjugal Rights against the respondent. M.C.No.623 of 2021 filed by the petitioner against the respondent is also pending adjudication before the Family Court, Thrissur. Hence, in the interest of justice, she seeks transfer of O.P.No.312 of 2023 from the Family Court, Aluva to the Family Court, Thrissur.

3. Though counsel for the respondent appeared and objected to the transfer petition, no counter affidavit has been filed.

4. Heard counsel on either side.

5. The law in respect of transfer of proceedings, particularly in matrimonial disputes, is no longer res-integra, in view of the categoric declaration of law by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sumitha Singh 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)]; wherein it is held that, it is the convenience of the woman and children that have to be looked into while ordering the transfer of a case from one Court to another. The law is quite categoric, and the wife's convenience has to be looked into while deciding a petition for transfer.

6. Thus, in the light of the uncontroverted averments in the memorandum of transfer petition and considering the comparative hardship of the wife which has to be given due weightage, when compared to that of the husband as well as the law laid down by the Hon' ble Supreme Court in the afore-cited decisions, I am inclined to allow this transfer petition.

In the result, Tr.P.C.No.467 of 2024 is allowed, withdrawing O.P.No.312 of 2023 is pending before the Family Court, Aluva, and transferring it to the Family Court, Thrissur. The Family Court, Aluva, shall transfer the records to the Family Court, Thrissur, immediately. The parties are directed to appear before the Family Court, Thrissur, on 20.04.2025.

Sd/-

BASANT BALAJI, JUDGE ss APPENDIX OF TR.P(C) 467/2024 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure A1 TRUE COPY OF O.P. NO. 2007/2021 FILED BY RESPONDENT BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, ERNAKULAM DATED 7.9.2021 (NEW NO. 312/2023 OF FAMILY COURT, ALUVA)