High CourtsSingle Bench

Mini. L. vs Krishna Kumar S.

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 20 February 2014 · Citation: (2014) 02 KL CK 0147

HON’BLE JUDGES
A. Muhamed Mustaque, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Section 24
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Tr.P.(C) No. 525 of 2012
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

5 paragraphs · 365 words

A. Muhamed Mustaque, J.—This petition is filed u/s 24 of CPC seeking transfer of O.P.(Divorce) No. 1062 of 2012 on the file of the Family Court, Alappuzha to the Family Court, Thiruvananthapuram.

2.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the respondent.

3.

The petitioner is the wife and the respondent is the husband. The petitioner is currently residing at Thiruvananthapuram. The respondent filed O.P. (Div.) No. 1062 of 2012 before the Family Court, Alappuzha for a decree of divorce. The petitioner submits that she being a lady and aged 48 years and she finds it difficult to travel to Alappuzha on each occasion of the posting of the case. She further asserts that there is no one to accompany her to attend the case at Family Court, Alappuzha. The learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that the petitioner has also filed M.C.No. 693 of 2012 before the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Thiruvananthapuram. On the other hand, respondent''s counsel opposed the transfer petition. It is apprehended by the respondent that he will be manhandled if the case is transferred to Thiruvananthapuram where the petitioner and her family members are residing. Respondents apprehends misdeeds and other threats from the petitioner''s side to arrive at a settlement. On going through the pleadings and arguments of the parties, I find, this is a fit case, in which the transfer petition can be allowed. The inconvenience of the parties is one of the ground on which application can be entertained and order of transfer can be passed. The petitioner being a lady, her apprehension that travelling such a long distance on each day of posting would deny her opportunity to defend the case filed against her by the respondent, need not be discarded.

4.

Mere apprehension made by the respondent that he will be manhandled at Thiruvananthapuram, is not a reason to deny the transfer if the petitioner is otherwise entitled for such transfer. Considering the distance and the difficulty expressed by the petitioner, this petition is allowed.

In the result, O.P.(Divorce) No. 1062 of 2012 on the file of the Family Court, Alappuzha is withdrawn from the said court and transferred to the Family Court, Thiruvananthapuram.