Nayana Venu vs Vineeth T.K
2022 Latest Caselaw 6829 Ker

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                 PRESENT
                 THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
    TUESDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 24TH JYAISHTA, 1944
                         TR.P(C) NO. 153 OF 2022
TO TRANSFER OP 18/2022 OF FAMILY COURT, KASARAGOD TO THE FAMILY
                              COURT, KANNUR
PETITIONER:

             NAYANA VENU
             AGED 28 YEARS
             D/O VENU, POTTANPARAMBIL HOUSE,
             MEENACHIL, ARUNAPURAM, P.O.EDANAD,
             KOTTAYAM, PIN-685674
             NOW RESIDING AT CHEMBAKASSERI HOUSE,
             C/O AJESH ALIAS AJOOTTAN, KARA,
             P.O.ANNUR, PAYYANNUR TALUK,
             KANNUR DISTRICT. PIN-670307.
             BY ADVS.
             O.V.MANIPRASAD
             JOSE ANTONY
             S.SHIV SHANKAR
             SRUTHYMON P.R


RESPONDENT:

             VINEETH T.K, AGED 35 YEARS
             S/O RAVI P.K, RESIDING AT KIZHAKKE MADATHIL HOUSE,
             PANATHADY,
             P.O PANATHADY,KALLAR VILLAGE, VELLARIKUNDU TALUK,
             KASARAGOD DIST. PIN- 671532
     THIS     TRANSFER    PETITION   (CIVIL)   HAVING   COME   UP   FOR
ADMISSION ON 14.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
                                    2
Tr.P (C) No.153 of 2022




           Dated this the 14th day of June, 2022.

                               ORDER

The transfer petition is filed under Sec.24 of the

Code of Civil Procedure, seeking to transfer O.P

No.18/2022 (Annexure A1) from the Family Court,

Kasaragod to the Family Court, Kannur.

2. The petitioner's case, in brief, in the

memorandum of transfer petition is that, she is the wife

of the respondent. They have a daughter born in their

wedlock. Since the respondent has deserted the

petitioner and the child, and has refused to maintain

them, the petitioner has filed M.C. No.55/2022

(Annexure A2) under Section 12 of the Protection of

Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, before the

Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Payyannur. She

has also filed O.P No.282/2022 (Annexure A3) and M.C.

No.62/2022 (Annexure A4) before the Family Court,

Kannur, seeking a decree for return of gold ornaments

Tr.P (C) No.153 of 2022

and also for an order of maintenance under Section

125(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The

petitioner and the child are residing in Payyannur. The

respondent has not sought for the transfer of

Annexures A2 to A4. Therefore, necessarily, he would

have to appear before the Courts at Kannur. On the

other hand, it would be difficult for the petitioner and

the child to travel to Kasaragod to defend Annexure A1.

Hence, the transfer petition.

3. Heard; Sri. O.V. Maniprasad, the learned

counsel appearing for the petitioner. Even though

notice has been served on the respondent, there is no

appearance for him.

4. 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

Tr.P (C) No.153 of 2022

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.

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

cited decisions, the uncontroverted pleadings and

materials on record, the totality of the facts and

circumstances of the case, particularly the fact that

Annexures A3 and A4 are pending before the Family

Court, Kannur, and it would be convenient for all

parties if the cases are consolidated and jointly tried

by the same court, which would save precious judicial

time and avoid conflict of decisions, I am inclined to

exercise the discretionary powers of this Court under

Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure and allow the

transfer petition.

Tr.P (C) No.153 of 2022

In the result, I allow the transfer petition by

ordering the transfer of O.P No.18/2022 from the

Family Court, Kasaragod to the Family Court, Kannur.

The parties would be at liberty to move the Family

Court, Kannur and seek for consolidation and joint trial

of all the cases between them. The Registry shall

forthwith forward a copy of this judgment to the Family

Court, Kasaragod, with instructions to forthwith

transmit the records in Annexure A1 to the Family

Court, Kannur. The Family Court, Kannur, shall,

immediately on the receipt of the records in O.P

No.18/2022, call Annexure A1 along with Annexures A3

and A4.

SD/-

C.S.DIAS, JUDGE

rmm/14.6.2022

Tr.P (C) No.153 of 2022

APPENDIX

PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure A1 A TRUE COPY OF THE OP NO. 18/2022 PENDING BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, KASARAGOD Annexure A2 A TRUE COPY OF THE MC NO.55/2022 BEFORE THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS COURT, PAYYANNUR ANNEXURE A3 A TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION IN O.P.

NO.282/2022 OF THE FAMILY COURT, KANNUR ANNEXURE A4 A TRUE COPY OF M.C. NO.62/2022 PENDING BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, KANNUR