Allowed

Greeta Mathew v. Jaijo Palliparamban

Kerala HC24 Nov 2016Tr.P(C)/205/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this transfer petition, the High Court considered moving a suit for restitution of conjugal rights from Alappuzha to Ernakulam. The respondent consented, and two other suits between the parties were already pending in Ernakulam. The court held transfer was necessary for convenience and joint trial.

What did the court decide?

The executed O.P. 109/2016 before Family Court, Alappuzha is transferred to Family Court, Ernakulam to be tried with O.P. 177/2016 and O.P. 603/2016.

Greeta Mathew Vs Jaijo Palliparamban — Matrimonial and Divorce | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAMAKRISHNAN

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2016/3RD AGRAHAYANA, 1938

¶5

Tr.P(C).No. 205 of 2016

¶6

OP 109/2016 OF FAMILY COURT, ALAPPUZHA

¶7

PETITIONER(S):

¶8

GREETA MATHEW, AGED 25 YEARS, D/O.V.T.MATHEW, FLAT NO.3, RAAHAT APARTMENT, KARUVALLI ROAD, COCHIN UNIVERSITY PO, KOCHI-682 022.

¶9

BY ADVS.SMT.K.MEERA SRI.BOBY MATHEW

¶10

RESPONDENT(S):

¶11

JAIJO PALLIPARAMBAN, AGED 30 YEARS, S/O.P.J.JAYAMOHAN, PALLIPARAMBIL, CONVENT SQUARE, OPP. NORTH POLICE QUARTERS, SEA VIEW WARD, ALAPPUZHA-688 012.

¶12

BY ADVS. SMT.GISA SUSAN THOMAS SMT.G.ASHWINI

¶13

THIS TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24-11-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

¶15

Tr.P(C).No. 205 of 2016

¶16

APPENDIX

¶17

PETITIONER(S)' ANNEXURES

¶18

A1 TRUE COPY OF OP.109/16 PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE FAMILY COURT ALAPPUZHA

¶19

A2 TRUE COPY OF THE SUMMONS DATED 11/2/16 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER IN ANNEXURE A1 OP.

¶20

RESPONDENT(S)' ANNEXURES

NIL.

/ TRUE COPY /

P.S. TO JUDGE

K.RAMAKRISHNAN, J.

¶26

Tr.P.(C) No.205 of 2016

¶27

------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 24^th day of November, 2016

¶28

ORDER

¶29

This petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking transfer of O.P.109/2016 pending before Family Court, Alappuzha to Family Court, Ernakulam under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

¶30

It is alleged in the petition that the petitioner is the wife of the respondent and their marriage was solemnised on on 5.9.2015 and due to some misunderstanding between them, she had to leave the matrimonial home and now she is residing along with her parents in Ernakulam. The petitioner and respondent are working in Ernakulam. The petitioner filed O.P.177/2016 for declaring the marriage as null and void and an alternate prayer for divorce and also filed O.P.603/2016 for return of gold ornaments against the respondent and his parents. In both these cases respondent entered appearance. Now the respondent filed O.P.109/2016 before the Family Court, Alappuzha, seeking restitution of conjugal rights. Petitioner is finding it difficult to go to Alappuzha. Since there are two other cases pending between the same parties, if the other cases are also transferred to Ernakulam, it will be convenient for both the parties. So he prays for allowing the application.

¶31

Respondent served with notice and he appeared through

¶32

Tr.P. (C) No.205 of 2016

¶33

¶34

Smt.Jisha Susan Thomas.

¶35

Heard Smt.Meera.K and Smt.Jisha Susan Thomas.

¶36

When the application came up for hearing today, the

¶37

counsel for the respondent submitted that the respondent has no objection in transferring the case as the matter has been settled between the parties and there are two other cases pending before the Family Court, Ernakulam and they can settled all the cases, if the other case is also transferred to Ernakulam. Considering the fact that two other cases are pending before the Family Court, Ernakulam between the same parties, no hardship will be caused to the respondent in this case, the case is also transferred to Family Court, Ernakulam. So that all the cases can be tried from one court. So this court feels that it is necessary in the interest of justice to transfer O.P.109/2016 pending before the Family Court, Alappuzha to Family Court, Ernakulam to be tried along with other cases pending before that court.

¶38

So the application is allowed and O.P.109/2016 pending before Family Court, Alappuzha is withdrawn and transferred to Family Court, Ernakulam to be tried along with O.P.177/2016 and O.P.603/2016, both pending before that court. If an application for joint trial is filed that can be considered by that court. Both the counsel submitted that

¶39

Tr.P. (C) No.205 of 2016

¶40

¶41

if a date is fixed for their appearance they are prepared to appear before the transferee court. Parties are directed to appear before the Family Court, Ernakulam on 08.01.2017. The Family Court, Alappuzha is directed to transmit the records to the Family Court, Ernakulam immediately.

¶42

Registry is directed to communicate this order to both the courts at the earliest.

¶43

Sd/- (K. Ramakrishnan, Judge)

¶44

//True Copy//

¶45

P.A. to Judge

¶46

Greeta Mathew v. Jaijo Palliparamban

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Greeta Mathew v. Jaijo Palliparamban

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

Shyni B. Maichel Vs Benny

Sasibala .G. Vs Geetha Devi

M/S Muthoot Vehicle and Asset Finance Ltd. Vs Geo Wilson

P.M.Gayathri Vs C.Sreejith

Santhakumari Vs Vivek K. Rahul

S.Jancy Vs S.Ratheesh