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

2025 Supreme(Online)(SC) 6820

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
K VINOD CHANDRAN, J
VISHNUPRIYA MARAR – Appellant
Versus
SUJAY – Respondent
TRANSFER PETITION(S) (CIVIL) NO(S). 266/2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Ms. Deepa Joseph, Mr. Blessan Mathews, Ms. Shweta Garg
For the Respondents: Mr. Wills Mathews, Mrs. Anila Tharakan Thomas, Mr. Dhanesh M. Nair, Mr. Rabin Majumder

A transfer of proceedings is warranted for equitable consideration in matrimonial disputes based on the parties' current locations.

Headnote:In the matter of Transfer Petition (Civil) No. 266/2025, the petitioner, the wife, seeks transfer of a matrimonial dispute initiated by the husband at the Family Court in Kerala to Delhi where she currently resides (Paragraphs 1-6). The court finds that it is equitable to transfer the proceedings considering the distance and circumstances detailed (Paragraphs 6-8). The transfer petition is allowed as stated in the signed order (Paragraph 10).

Table of Content
1. transfer of matrimonial case due to geographical inconvenience. (Para 1 , 2)
2. arguments about the feasibility and implications of the transfer. (Para 3 , 4)

O R D E R

1. The petitioner, is the wife, who is seeking transfer of O.P. No.223 of 2023 filed for dissolution of marriage by the husband/Respondent herein.

2. The proceedings have been initiated by the husband at the Family Court at Muvattupuzha, Kerala, which is the jurisdictional Court, insofar as the location of the marriage is concerned. The petitioner is now residing and working at Delhi and hence the transfer petition.

3. I have heard both the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondent.

4. Learned counsel for the respondent points out that the transfer petition itself has been filed after two years and Signature Not Verified D Ni Ag Rita Ell Ny Ds Rig An e Pd R b Ay SAtDhere is a Power of Attorney executed by the petitioner and an Date: 2025.07.24

16:27:40 IST Reason:

application for video conferencing has also been filed in the Family Court at Kerala.

5. Admittedly, the respondent/husband is now at Dubai and he also appears through video conferencing at Kerala. Insofar as the Power of Attorney executed, considering the fact that it is a matrimonial dispute, it will be difficult for the Power of Attorney holder to adduce evidence on behalf of the petitioner/wife. As far as the respondent/husband is concerned, even now he is on video conferencing and if the proceedings are continued in Kerala, if the presence of the parties are required, both will have to travel to Kerala.

6. Hence, on an equitable consideration this Court is of the opinion that the matter pending before the Family Court at Muvattupuzha, Kerala can be transferred to the Family Court, North West District, Rohini Courts, Delhi.

7. The respondent/husband would be entitled to seek for video conferencing and the presence would be insisted by the learned Family Court only if it is imperative.

8. Accordingly, O.P. No.223/2003 pending before the Family Court at Muvattupuzha, Kerala is ordered to be transferred to the Court of Family Court, North West District, Rohini Courts, Delhi.

9. The Family Court at Muvattupuzha, Kerala shall send the case records to the transferee Court promptly and without any delay.

10. The transfer petition is, accordingly, allowed.

11. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.

...........................J.

( K. VINOD CHANDRAN )

NEW DELHI JULY 21, 2025 ITEM NO.1611 COURT NO.10 SECTION XI-A S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS TRANSFER PETITION(S)(CIVIL) NO(S). 266/2025 VISHNUPRIYA MARAR PETITIONER(S)

VERSUS SUJAY RESPONDENT(S)

MEDIATION REPORT RECEIVED IA No. 28162/2025 - EX-PARTE STAY Date : 21-07-2025 This matter was called on for hearing today.

CORAM :

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K. VINOD CHANDRAN For Petitioner(s) :

Ms. Deepa Joseph, Adv.

Mr. Blessan Mathews, Adv.

Ms. Shweta Garg, AOR For Respondent(s) :

Mr. Wills Mathews, Adv.

Mrs. Anila Tharakan Thomas, Adv.

Mr. Dhanesh M. Nair, Adv.

Mr. Rabin Majumder, AOR UPON hearing the counsel, the Court made the following

O R D E R

The transfer petition is allowed, in terms of the signed order.

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