Allowed

Veena Johnson v. Siril Raphael

Kerala HC22 Jun 2022Tr.P(C)/149/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a transfer petition seeking to move a restitution of conjugal rights case from Thrissur to Irinjalakuda. This was to consolidate it with the wife's pending divorce petition in Irinjalakuda, citing convenience and avoidance of conflicting decisions.

What did the court decide?

Order No.1789/2021 transferred from Family Court Thrissur to Family Court Irinjalakuda with instruction for consolidated trial.

Veena Johnson Vs Siril Raphael — Matrimonial and Divorce | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

¶2

TR.P(C) NO. 149 OF 2022

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶4

PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS

¶6

WEDNESDAY, THE 22^ND DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 1ST ASHADHA, 1944

¶7

TR.P(C) NO. 149 OF 2022

¶8

IN OP 1789/2021 OF FAMILY COURT,THRISSUR

¶9

PETITIONER/S:

¶10

VEENA JOHNSON

¶11

AGED 27 YEARS, D/OJOHNSON & W/O SIRIL RAPHAEL CHAKKALAKKAL HOUSE, POYYA KAMPANIPPADI DESOM, POYYA VILLAGE, POYYA P.O., KODUNGALLUR TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN 680 733., PIN - 680733

¶12

BY ADVS. PRABHU K.N. MANUMON A.

¶13

RESPONDENT/S:

¶14

SIRIL RAPHAEL AGED 32 YEARS, S/ORAPHAEL PALLIYEKKARA HOUSE, AAVINISSERRY DESOM, AAVINISSERRY VILLAGE, AAVINISSERRY P.O., THRISSUR TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN 680 306., PIN - 680306

¶15

THIS TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

¶17

TR.P(C) NO. 149 OF 2022

¶18

ORDER

¶19

The transfer petition is filed under Sec.24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, seeking to transfer O.P No.1789/2021 (Exhibit P2) from the Family Court, Thrissur to the Family Court, Irinjalakuda.

¶20

The petitioner’s case in brief, in the memorandum of transfer petition is that, she is the wife of the respondent. Due to the matrimonial cruelty meted out on her, she has filed O.P.No.613/2021 (Exhibit P1) against the respondent before the Family Court, Irinjalakuda, seeking a decree of divorce. As counter blast to the above proceeding, the respondent has filed Ext.P2 seeking a decree for restitution of conjugal rights. The respondent has not sought for transfer of Ext.P1. Therefore, necessarily, he has to appear before the Family Court, Irinjalakuda to contest Ext.P1. Hence, the transfer petition.

¶21

TR.P(C) NO. 149 OF 2022

¶22

¶23

Heard; Sri.Prabhu K.N., the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. Even though notice has been served on the respondent, there is no appearance for him.

¶24

The law with respect to transfer of proceedings, particularly matrimonial disputes, is no longer res-integra, in view of the categoric declaration of law by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sumitha Sing V. Kumar Sanjay and another [2002 KHC 1889], Mona Aresh Goel V. Aresh Satya Goel [2000 KHC 1835], Vaishali Shridhar Jagtap V. Shridhar Vishwanath Jagtap [2016 KHC 6489] and Santhini V. Vijaya Venkatesh [2017 (5) KHC 48]. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that it is the convenience of the woman and children that has to be looked into, while ordering the transfer of a case from one Court to another.

¶25

In the light of the law laid down in the afore-

¶26

TR.P(C) NO. 149 OF 2022

¶27

¶28

cited decisions, the uncontroverted pleadings and materials on record, the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, especially the fact that Ext.P1 is pending before the Family Court, Irinjalakuda and the respondent is contesting the proceeding there, I am inclined to exercise the discretionary powers of this Court under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure and order the transfer of the case, so that the cases can be consolidated and jointly tried, which would save precious judicial time and avoid conflict of decisions.

¶29

In the result, I allow the transfer petition as follows:-

¶30

(i) O.P No.1789/2021 is transferred from the Family Court, Thrissur to the Family Court, Irinjalakuda.

¶31

(ii) The parties would be at liberty to move the Family Court, Irinjalakuda, for consolidation

¶32

TR.P(C) NO. 149 OF 2022

¶33

¶34

and joint trial of all the cases between them.

¶35

(iii) The Registry shall forward a copy of this

¶36

order to the Family Court, Thrissur with instructions to forthwith transmit the records in Ext.P2 to the Family Court, Irinjalakuda.

¶37

(iv) The Family Court, Irinjalakuda shall, immediately on receipt of the records in Ext.P2, call the case along with Ext.P1.

Sd/-

C.S.DIAS, JUDGE

rkc/22.06.22

TR.P(C) NO. 149 OF 2022

¶42

¶43

APPENDIX OF TR.P(C) 149/2022

¶44

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS

¶45

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF O.P NO.613/2021 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE FAMILY COURT IRIJALAKUDA FOR DISSOLUTION OF MARRIAGE Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF O.P.NO.1789/2021 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT BEFORE FAMILY COURT THRISSUR FOR RESTITUTION OF CONJUGAL RIGHTS

Veena Johnson v. Siril Raphael

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Veena Johnson v. Siril Raphael

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vasanthy Vs R.Prasannan

P.J.Mathew Vs P.J.Kuriachan

Sherin Thomas Vs Ditto Vazhakkattu Thomas

Jayasheela Vs Additional Superintendent of Police

Balbina @ Balbina Ezmeralda Fernandas Vs Valsa Joseph

E.C.Pankajakshi Vs Suja