This transfer petition sought to move a divorce dispute from the Family Court, Attingal, to the Family Court, Thiruvananthapuram. Citing Supreme Court precedents prioritizing the wife's convenience in matrimonial disputes, the court allowed the transfer.
Transfer of O.P.(Divorce) No. 675 of 2020 from Family Court, Attingal to Family Court, Thiruvananthapuram.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN
MONDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2021 / 12TH ASWINA, 1943
TR.P(C) NO. 262 OF 2021
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN OPDIV 675/2020 OF FAMILY COURT, ATTINGAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
PETITIONER/S:
UMA DEVI S AGED 40 YEARS D/O.K. SUKUMARAN NAIR, SBRA-2A, TC 55/1309(3), SABARI LANE, MARUTHOORKADAVU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
BY ADV NAVEEN RADHAKRISHNAN
RESPONDENT/S:
SATHEESH A.V AGED 47 YEARS, S/O.AYYAPPAN PILLAI, VATTAVILAKATHU VEEDU, RVRA-76, RAMACHAMVILA, ATTINGAL P.O., CHIRAYANKEEZHU TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
THIS TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04.10.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
TR.P(C) NO. 262 OF 2021
4
O R D E R
Dated this the 4th day of October 2021
The marital discord among the spouses has resulted in the petitioner/ wife filing MC No. 327 of 2020 before the Family Court, Thiruvananthapuram. In turn the respondent / husband has filed OP(Divorce)No.675 of 2020 before the Family Court, Attingal. The petitioner, who is a permanent resident of Maruthoorkadavu in Thiruvananthapuram, seeks transfer of the original petition filed by the respondent to the Family Court, Thiruvananthapuram. The responsibility of looking after a minor child, the advanced age of the petitioner's parents and the difficulty in traveling from Thiruvananathapuram to Attingal to contest the case are projected as reasons for transfer.
2.Despite service of notice, the respondent has not entered appearance.
3.Having heard the learned counsel and being guided by the decisions of the Honourable Supreme Court in Sumita Singh v Kumar Sanjay and another [(2001) 10 SCC 41, Rajani Kishore Pardesh v
TR.P(C) NO. 262 OF 2021
4
Kishore Babulal Pardesh [ (2005) 1 SCC 237 and a plethora of other decisions, holding that in transfer petitions arising from matrimonial cases, convenience of the wife should be preferred over that of the husband, I am inclined to allow the request for transfer.
In the result, the transfer petition is allowed. O.P.(Divorce)No. 675 of 2020 on the files of the Family Court, Attingal shall forthwith be transferred to the Family Court, Thiruvananthapuram.
Sd/ - V.G ARUN JUDGE
SJ
TR.P(C) NO. 262 OF 2021
4
APPENDIX OF TR.P(C) 262/2021
PETITIONER ANNEXURE
| ANNEXURE A1 | TRUE COPY OF THE MC 327/2020 FILED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 6/10/2020 BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. |
|---|---|
| ANNEXURE A2 | TRUE COPY OF THE O.P.(HMA) NO.675/2020 BEFORE THE HON'BLE FAMILY COURT, ATTINGAL FOR THE DISSOLUTION OF MARRIAGE BETWEEN PETITIONER AND RESPONDENT. |
| ANNEXURE A3 | TRUE COPY OF THE ADHAR CARD ISSUED TO THE PARENTS OF THE PETITIONER'S |
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to allow the transfer of a divorce petition filed before the Family Court, Attingal, to the Family Court, Thiruvananthapuram, based on the wife's convenience.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Sumita Singh v Kumar Sanjay and anotherReferred¶19
Sumita Singh v Kumar Sanjay and another [(2001) 10 SCC 41 · Who else cites this
Rajani Kishore Pardesh v Kishore Babulal PardeshReferred¶19
Rajani Kishore Pardesh v Kishore Babulal Pardesh [ (2005) 1 SCC 237 · Who else cites this
Uma Devi S
Satheesh A.V
V.G. Arun
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
V.G. Arun
Parties & counsel
