Allowed

Deepa Joy Joseph v. Linse Joseph

Kerala HC8 Dec 2016Tr.P(C)/578/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought transfer of divorce O.P.315/2016 from Family Court Thodupuzha to Family Court Kottayam at Ettumanoor under Sec 24 CPC. Court allowed transfer noting petitioner's residence change to parental home in Kottayam, lack of employment, and convenience for appearing in related maintenance case.

What did the court decide?

O.P.(Div.)315/2016 pending before Family Court, Thodupuzha is withdrawn and transferred to Family Court, Kottayam at Ettumanoor.

Deepa Joy Joseph Vs Linse Joseph — 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 8TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2016/17TH AGRAHAYANA, 1938

¶5

Tr.P(C).No. 578 of 2016

¶6

OP(DIV) 315/2016 OF FAMILY COURT, THODUPUZHA

¶7

PETITIONER(S):

¶8

DEEPA JOY JOSEPH, D/O.JOY JOSEPH, AGED 34 YEARS, VALIAVELICHATHU (JOY VILLA) HOUSE, ERAVIMANGALAM, MEMURY P.O., KOTTAYAM.

¶9

BY ADVS.SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR) SRI.NANDAGOPAL S.KURUP

¶10

RESPONDENT(S):

¶11

LINSE JOSEPH, S/O.JOSEPH, AGED 37 YEARS, ELAVUMKAL HOUSE, KARIMKUNNAM KARA, KARIMKUNNAM VILLAGE - 682 001.

¶12

BY ADV. SRI.UNNIKRISHNAN V.ALAPATT

¶13

THIS TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08-12-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

msv/

¶15

TR.P(C).No. 578 of 2016

¶16

-----------------------

¶17

APPENDIX

¶18

PETITIONER(S)' ANNEXURES:

¶19

ANNEX A1: COPY OF THE OP.NO.315/2016 ON THE FILE OF THE FAMILY COURT, THODUPUZHA.

¶20

ANNEX A2: COPY OF THE PETITION IN MC.NO.193/2016 ON THE FILES OF THE FAMILY COURT, ETTUMANOOR IN KOTTAYAM.

¶21

RESPONDENT(S)' ANNEXURE

NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.S.TO JUDGE

msv/

K.RAMAKRISHNAN, J.

¶27

Tr.P.(C)No.578 of 2016

¶28

Dated this the 8^th day of December, 2016

¶29

ORDER

¶30

This petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking transfer of O.P.No.315/2016 pending before the Family Court, Thodupuzha to Family Court, Kottayam at Ettumanoor under section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

¶31

It is alleged in the petition that the marriage between the petitioner and respondent was solemnised on 06.08.2009 and they lived together as husband and wife for some time and a child was born to them in that wedlock. Due to some difference of opinion between them, they are now residing separately. The petitioner is now residing along with her parents at Neryamangalam in Memmury post. She filed M.C.193/2016 before the Family Court, Ettumanoor at Kottayam under Section 125 of Code of Criminal Procedure. The respondent herein filed O.P.315/2016 before the Family Court, Thodupuzha for divorce. She is finding it difficult to go to Thodupuzha to condcct the case, so she prays for transfer of the case to Family Court, Ettumanoor.

¶32

Heard Sri.Nandagopal S.Kurup, counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.Unnikrishnan V.Alappat, counsel for the respondent.

¶33

The counsel for the respondent submitted that there is another case pending before the Judicial First Class Magistrate,

¶34

Tr.P.(C)No.578 of 2016

¶35

¶36

Thodupuzha which was filed by the petitioner under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act. Further the distance between the place of residence of the petitioner to Ettumanoor and Thodupuzha is equal, so there is no necessity to transfer the case.

¶37

On the other hand, the counsel for the petitioner submitted that when she was residing in the shared house, it is situated in Thodupuzha, anticipating forceful eviction, she filed the application before the Judicial First Class magistrate, Thodupuzha under the provisions of the Domestic Violence Act, but later she was thrown out from the house. Now she is residing along with her parents at Memury, so she prays for allowing the application.

¶38

The marital relationship and the birth of the child are not in dispute. It is also not in dispute that they are now residing separately and the petitioner is now residing along with her parents in her parental house at Memmuryin Kottayam District. The fact that the petitioner filed M.C.193/2016 for maintenance before the Family Court, Ettumanoor and the respondent is appearing in that case also not in dispute. The respondent filed O.P.315/2016 before the Family Court, Thodupuzha for divorce. It is also mentioned that the petitioner has taken steps to transfer the domestic violence case pending before the

¶39

Tr.P.(C)No.578 of 2016

¶40

¶41

Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Thodupuzha to any court at Ettumanoor and that is pending before the court dealing with criminal matters. I am not considering those matters at this stage. Considering the fact that petitioner is a lady without employment and also considering the fact that the circumstances under which the case under the provisions of Domestic Violence Act has been filed, this court feels that, that cannot be a ground for denying transfer, especially when she is without any employment and residing in her parental house at their support at present. Somebody will have accompany her to go to Thodupuzha whereas Ettumanoor will be convenient for her as it is a place of her acquaintance. So considering the circumstances, this court feels that it is necessary in the interest of justice to transfer O.P.(Div.)315/2016 pending before the Family Court, Thodupuzha to Family Court, Kottayam at Ettumanoor for disposal.

¶42

So the application is allowed and O.P.(Div.)315/2016 pending before the Family Court, Thodupuzha is withdrawn and transferred to Family Court, Kottayam at Ettumanoor for disposal. The Family Court, Thodupuzha is directed to transmit the records to Family Court, Kottayam at Ettumanoor, immediately. Both the counsel submitted that, if a date is fixed for their appearance, they will appear before that

¶43

Tr.P.(C)No.578 of 2016

¶44

¶45

court. Parties are directed to appear before that court on 23.01.2017. With the above direction and observation the petition is disposed

¶46

of.

¶47

Registry is directed to communicate this order to concerned

¶48

courts immediately.

¶49

Sd/- (K. Ramakrishnan, Judge)

¶50

//True Copy//

¶51

P.A. to Judge

¶52

Deepa Joy Joseph v. Linse Joseph

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deepa Joy Joseph v. Linse Joseph

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

Bijo Varghese Vs the Catholic Syrian Bank Ltd.

Anitha Kumari.S Vs Jayasree

Kesavapilla Gopakumar Vs Padmanabha Pillai Kumaraswamy @ Palani

Susan Sarish Sunny Vs Dr.Sarish Mammen Sunny

Idol of Sree Asuramahakalan Temple Vs Muhammedkutty

Sumana Mol P.S Vs Bharath Sanchar Nigam Ltd.