Prasanthi.S Vs Jathin Harishankar Vyas

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 21^ST DAY OF MARCH 2025 / 30TH PHALGUNA, 1946

¶5

TR.P(C) NO. 818 OF 2024

¶6

OP NO.1862 OF 2023 OF FAMILY COURT, ERNAKULAM

¶7

PETITIONER:

¶8

PRASANTHI.S AGED 33 YEARS D/O. LATE PRASANNAKUMAR, KAMBISSERIL PUTHENVEEDU, KADATHOOR, K.S. PURAM P.O., VAVVAKKAVU, KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN - 691001 BY ADV C.K.SREEJITH

¶9

RESPONDENT:

¶10

JATHIN HARISHANKAR VYAS AGED 34 YEARS S/O. LATE HARISHANKARVYAS, SHIV KRUPA, GUJARATI ROAD, MATTANCHERRY, KOCHI, PIN - 682002

¶11

BY ADVS. M.H.HANIS T.N.LEKSHMI SHANKAR(K/1181/2010) NANCY MOL P.(K/650/2012) NEETHU.G.NADH(K/241/2014) ANANDHU P.C.(K/1254/2020) RIA ELIZABETH T.J.(K/001606/2024) SINISHA JOSHY(K/002029/2024) SAHAD M. HANIS(K/003446/2024)

¶12

THIS TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21.03.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

TR.PC 818/2024

-2-

2025:KER:25848

O R D E R

(Dated this the 21st day of March, 2025)

¶18

The petitioner is the wife of the respondent. The

¶19

respondent filed OP No.1862/2023 before the Family Court, Ernakulam, to declare the marriage between them as null and void on the ground of non-consummation of marriage. Their marriage was solemnized on 08.06.2023. The petitioner is a permanent resident of Kollam. She has no income to conduct

¶20

the case pending before the Family Court, Ernakulam. The distance between the Family Court, Ernakulam, and her residence is more than 200 kms. It is very difficult for her to travel alone such a distance. Therefore, she seeks a transfer of OP No.1862/2023 pending before the Family Court, Ernakulam, to the Family Court, Kollam.

¶21

A counter affidavit is filed by the respondent,

¶22

and it is averred that the petitioner used to harass the respondent mentally and physically in the initial days of the

¶23

TR.PC 818/2024

¶24

-3-

¶25

2025:KER:25848 marriage itself. They resided together only for five days at his house. On receipt of notice from the Family Court, Ernakulam, the petitioner appeared through counsel and she attended the counseling. On 12.12.2023 after attending counseling when both the parties came out of the counseling hall, the petitioner along with her henchmen conspired together and attacked the respondent. She slapped the respondent on his face and assaulted and abused him with filthy language in the court premises. A crime has been registered as Crime No.97/2024 by the Central Police Station under Sections 323, 341, 294(b), 506 and 34 IPC. Therefore, it is prayed that the transfer petition be dismissed.

¶26

It is not in dispute that the petitioner is a resident of Kollam, and she is aged 33 years. The respondent is 34 years and he is working as an Assistant Manager at KPMG, Kakkanad. It is also not in dispute that the distance between the Family Court, Ernakulam, and the petitioner's

TR.PC 818/2024

-4-

2025:KER:25848

residence is more than 200 kms. Therefore, taking into

¶31

consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, I deem

¶32

it appropriate to allow the transfer petition.

¶33

Moreover, the law in respect of transfer of proceedings, particularly in matrimonial disputes, is no longer res-integra, in view of the categoric declaration of law by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sumitha Singh v. Kumar Sanjay

¶34

and another [(2001)10 SCC 41)], Mona Aresh Goel v. Aresh

¶35

Satya Goel [(2000) 9 SCC 255], Vaishali Shridhar Jagtap v. Shridhar Vishwanath Jagtap [AIR 2016 SC 3584] and Santhini v. Vijaya Venkatesh [2017 (4) KLT 415 (SC)]; wherein it is held that it is the convenience of the woman and

¶36

children that have to be looked into while ordering the transfer of a case from one court to another. The law is quite categoric, and the wife's convenience has to be looked into

¶37

while deciding a petition for transfer, and in such cases, transfer has been effected.

¶38

TR.PC 818/2024

¶39

-5-

¶40

2025:KER:25848 5. Taking note of the fact that a crime has been

¶41

registered against the petitioner as Crime No.97/2024, and also

¶42

the respondent apprehends further attack from the petitioner, I deem it appropriate to dispense with the personal appearance of the respondent before the Family Court, Kollam. The Family Court, Kollam, shall order the personal appearance of the respondent only for the purpose of taking evidence or any such posting as if it is necessary at the discretion of the judge.

¶43

In the result, the Transfer Petition is allowed. OP No.1862/2023 pending before the Family Court, Ernakulam, is withdrawn and transferred to the Family Court, Kollam. The Family Court, Ernakulam, shall immediately transfer the records to the Family Court, Kollam. The parties are directed to appear before the Family Court, Kollam on 10.04.2025.

Sd/-

BASANT BALAJI JUDGE

JS

TR.PC 818/2024

-6-

2025:KER:25848