Allowed

Vidhya v. Satheesh.K

Kerala HC2 Dec 2016Tr.P(C)/602/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this transfer petition, the Kerala High Court ordered the transfer of family court proceedings for child custody from Malappuram to Kalpetta. The petitioner, a single mother residing with her daughter, sought relief from attending hearings in Malappuram due to employment hardship. The court found transfer necessary based on her residence and the child's convenience.

What did the court decide?

OP.No.483/2016 pending before Family Court, Malappuram is withdrawn and transferred to Family Court, Kalpetta for disposal.

Vidhya Vs Satheesh.K — 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

FRIDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF DECEMBER 2016/11TH AGRAHAYANA, 1938

¶5

Tr.P(C).No. 602 of 2016

¶6

OP 483/2016 OF FAMILY COURT, MALAPPURAM ------------------

¶7

PETITIONER:

¶8

VIDHYA, AGED 23, D/O. VISWANATHAN, KOTHAYATH HOUSE, PADIPPARAMBU, CHULLIYODE, NENMENI VILLAGE, SULTHAN BATHERY TALUK.

¶9

BY ADVS.SRI.V.RAJENDRAN (PERUMBAVOOR) SRI.GEORGE VARGHESE KIZHAKKAMBALAM SRI.N.RAJESH

¶10

RESPONDENT:

¶11

SATHEESH K, AGED 34, S/O. NARAYANASWAMI NAIR, KUTTIPPURATH HOUSE, CHERIPPARAMBU, VELIYAMCHERI P.O.-679326, EDAPPATTA VILLAGE, PERINTHALMANNA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

¶12

THIS TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02-12-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶13

K.V.

¶14

TPC NO 602 OF 2016:

¶15

APPENDIX

¶16

PETITIONERS ANNEXURES:

¶17

ANNEXURE A1: COPY OF ORDER IN M.C.87/15 DATED 6.5.2016 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT I,SULTHAN BATHERY.

¶18

ANNEXURE A2: COPY OF I.A.1374/16 IN OP 483/16 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT ON 6.9.2016 BEFORE FAMILY COURT,MALAPPURAM.

¶19

RESPONDENTS ANNEXURES: NIL

/TRUE COPY/

P.A.TO JUDGE

K.V.

K. RAMAKRISHNAN, J.

¶24

....................................... Tr.P.(C).No.602 of 2016

¶25

........................................ Dated this the 2^nd day of December, 2016.

¶26

O R D E R

¶27

This is a petition filed by the petitioner seeking transfer of OP.No.483/2016 pending before the Family Court, Malappuram to the Family Court, Kalpetta under section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

¶28

It is alleged in the petition that the petitioner is the wife of the respondent, whose marriage was solemnized on 24.10.2010 from the house of the petitioner. After their marriage, they resided together in the house of the respondent and a female child was born to them in that wedlock. She is aged 5 years now. Due to difference of opinion, she had to leave the matrimonial home with the child and she is now residing along with her daughter in her parental house at Sulthan Bathery. She filed MC.No.87/2015 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Sulthan Bathery claiming certain reliefs from the respondent under the provisions of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act. Though the respondent entered appearance and engaged a lawyer, he did not prosecute the same. So an ex parte order was passed on 6.5.2016 granting maintenance to herself and the child and other reliefs. It is thereafter that the respondent filed OP.No.483/2016 before the Family Court, Malappruam for permanent custody of the child and also filed IA.No.1374/2016 claiming temporary

¶29

Tr.P.(C).No.602 of 2016

¶30

¶31

custody and she received notice in that application. It is very difficult for her to go to Malappuram to conduct the case as she is without any employment. So she prays for transfer of the case to the Family Court, Kalpetta.

¶32

Though notice was served on the respondent, he remained absent.

¶33

Heard Sri.V. Rajendran Perumbavoor, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, who argued in support of his case in the petition.

¶34

It is an admitted fact that the petitioner is the wife of the respondent and their marriage was solemnized on 24.10.2010 from the residence of the petitioner and after the marriage they lived together as husband and wife at the residence of the respondent and a female child was born to them in that wedlock. It is also not in dispute that due to some difference of opinion, they fell apart and she had to leave the matrimonial home and she is now residing with the child at Sulthan Bathery along with her parents. It is seen from the petition that she filed MC.No.87/2015 against the respondent before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Sulthan Bathery for reliefs including maintenance for herself and the child under the provisions of Protection of Woman from Domestic Violence Act. It is mentioned in the petition that, that was decided ex parte and maintenance was ordered to the

¶35

Tr.P.(C).No.602 of 2016 3

¶36

petitioner and the child. It is thereafter that the respondent filed the present OP.No.483/2016 before the Family Court, Malappuram for permanent custody and also filed IA.No.1374/2016 for interim custody of the child. It is at that time she filed this petition for transfer of the case. It is seen from the allegations in the petition that she is without any employment and she is residing along with her parents with the minor female child. Asking such a lady to go to Malappuram to conduct the case will cause unnecessary hardship to her. Further it is settled law that place of residence of the wife will have to be considered while considering the question of transfer of matrimonial cases from one court to another. Since the respondent did not appear, it appears that he has no objection in transferring the case. Further the child is now with the mother and the case is now relating to the custody of the child. On that ground also the place of convenience of the child can be considered while considering the question of transfer of cases. Under such circumstances, this court feels that it is necessary in the interest of justice to transfer OP.No.483/2016 pending before the Family Court, Malappuram to the Family Court, Kalpetta.

¶37

So the petition is allowed. OP.No.483/2016 pending before the Family Court, Malappuram is withdrawn and transferred to the to the Family Court, Kalpetta for disposal. The Family Court,

¶38

Tr.P.(C).No.602 of 2016

¶39

¶40

Malappuram is directed to transmit the records to the Family Court, Kalpetta at the earliest.

¶41

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

¶42

Sd/-

¶43

K. RAMAKRISHNAN, JUDGE.

¶44

Vidhya v. Satheesh.K

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vidhya v. Satheesh.K

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

A.Syam(Incorrectly Shown as a.Sathyan in the Order) Vs Bharath Sanchar Nigam Limited

Seema S. Vs Bharath Sanchar Nigam Ltd.

S.Pradeep Kumar Vs Bharath Sanchar Nigam Ltd.

K.K.Balan Vs Suresh

Archana M.A. Vs Sathasivanpilla N.

Bijesh.K Vs Remya.P.G