Allowed

Alba v. Chandr Sekharan Vinayan

Kerala HC3 Jul 2009Tr.P(C)/157/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This transfer petition under Section 24 CPC was allowed. The High Court transferred a dissolution of marriage petition from the Family Court, Malappuram, to the Family Court, Thrissur, to avoid hardship for the wife and protect the child's interests.

What did the court decide?

Transfer of O.P. No. 435/2009 from Family Court, Malappuram to Family Court, Thrissur with immediate dispatch of records.

Alba Vs Chandr Sekharan Vinayan — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2009)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN FRIDAY, THE 3RD JULY 2009 / 12TH ASHADHA 1931 Tr.P(C).No. 157 of 2009() ------------------------OP.435/2009 of FAMILY COURT, MALAPPURAM ....................

¶3

PETITIONER: --------------------ALBA, AGED 26 YEARS, D/O.LATE SANKARANARAYANAN, THOZHUTHUMPARAMBIL HOUSE, CHERPU, OORAKAM P.O., THRISSUR(DIST.). BY ADVS. MR.BABU KARUKAPADATH, MR.K.A.NOUSHAD, MR.P.G.PRAMOD.

¶4

RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------CHANDRA SEKHARAN VIJAYAN, AGED 33 YEARS, S/O.CHANDRASEKHARAN, KOLAZHIKKARAN, "VINAYAM", 22ND MILES, MULLAMPARA ROAD, MANJERI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-676 121. BY ADV. MR.SAJU.S.A

¶5

THIS TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶6

Kss

¶7

S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, J.

¶8

Tr.P.C.No.157 of 2009

¶9

Dated this the 3^rd day of July, 2009

¶10

O R D E R

¶11

This petition is filed under Section 24 CPC. Petitioner is the

¶12

wife and respondent, the husband, and they are hereinafter referred to as such. Both of them are stated to be software engineers. The husband at present is employed at Bangalore and the wife, previously employed at Chennai, is now settled at Thrissur. Marriage between the parties was, admittedly, two years ago. But soon they got separated after having a child, now aged two years, who is admittedly, under the care and custody of the wife, the mother. Husband has filed a petition as O.P.No.435/2009 for dissolution of the marriage before the Family Court, Malappuram. Wife seeks transfer of that petition to the Family court, Thrissur by moving this petition.

¶13

Notice on the petition being given, the husband has

¶14

entered appearance through counsel. I heard the counsel on both sides.

¶15

At the time of hearing, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the wife that she has moved another petition claiming return of gold ornaments which are alleged to be retained by the

¶16

Tr.P.C.No.157 of 2009

¶17

¶18

husband and also for maintenance from him for herself and also the child. That petition filed before the Family Court, Thrissur is awaiting return of notice ordered to the husband. It is admitted that, that petition was filed after filing this transfer petition. The learned counsel for the husband submitted that there is no inconvenience for the wife to attend the Family Court, Malappuram and the transfer sought for under the petitioner is without bonafides.

¶19

Having heard the counsel at length and taking note of the facts and circumstances presented, it is inconvenient and difficult for the wife to attend the matrimonial proceedings at a court which is, admittedly, situated nearly 125 km away from her residence. She has a case that her father is no more and there are only female members at her residence. That also is a circumstance to be taken note of in considering whether she will be in a position to attend the court where the husband has commenced matrimonial proceedings against her. More than that, the interest of the minor child also deserve to be seriously taken note of. Separation of the parents is likely to have a psychological impact on the child and if he is deprived of the care

¶20

Tr.P.C.No.157 of 2009

¶21

¶22

and concern of the mother by driving her to attend a court ata far away place to defend herself in the matrimonial proceedings initiated by the father, it may have disastrous consequence on the wellbeing and growth of the child. Taking note of that circumstance also, I find that transfer of O.P.No.435/2009 to the Family Court, Thrissur where the other O.P. already filed by the wife is pending is necessary to advance the ends of justice. As the husband is now employed in Bangalore, transfer of the above case is not likely to cause him any inconvenience. So much so, transfer of O.P.435/2009 from the Family Court, Malappuram to the Family Court, Thrissur as prayed for by the wife is ordered directing the former court to send the records of the case to the latter court without delay.

¶23

Send a copy of the order to both courts and hand over a copy to the counsel on both sides on usual terms.

¶24

S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JUDGE.

¶25

bkn/-

Alba v. Chandr Sekharan Vinayan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Alba v. Chandr Sekharan Vinayan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ammad Vs Kunhami

Kammukutty Vs Aboobacker

Silpi Realtors and Contractors Vs M/S.Engineering Projects

Shine Kumar Vs James & Others

Nazeema Vs K.M.Nazeer

K.G.Sunil Dutt Vs Fr. K.P.Varghese and Others