High CourtsSingle Bench

Rajani D vs Kishore M.C.

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 24 August 2022 · Citation: (2022) 08 KL CK 0233

HON’BLE JUDGES
C.S.Dias, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code of Civill Procedure, 1908 — Section 24
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Transfer Petition (C) No. 360 Of 2022
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

11 paragraphs · 480 words

C.S Dias, J

1.

The transfer petition is filed under Sec.24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, seeking to transfer O.P (Div) No.494/2021 (Annexure-A1) from the Family Court, Ottapalam to the Family Court, Thiruvananthapuram.

2.

The petitioner’s case, in brief, in the memorandum of transfer petition is that, she is the wife of the respondent. They have two children born in their wedlock. Due to the matrimonial cruelty that was meted out on the petitioner by the respondent, she was constrained to leave the matrimonial home. The respondent has refused to maintain the petitioner and the younger child. Hence, the petitioner has filed MC No.142/2022 (Annexure A2), against the respondent, before the Family Court, Thiruvananthapuram. The respondent has filed Annexure A1, seeking a decree of divorce. There is no person to chaperone the petitioner from Thiruvananthapuram to Ottapalam to contest Annexure A1. Hence, the transfer petition.

3.

Heard; Sri.Babu Cherukara, 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 1835], Vaishali Shridhar Jagtap V. Shridhar Vishwanath Jagtap [2016 KHC 6489] , Santhini V. Vijaya Venkatesh [2017 (5) KHC 48] and N.C.V Aishwarya vs. A.S Saravana Karthik Sha [2022 (5) KHC 182]. 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 Annexure A2 is pending before the Family Court, Thiruvananthapuram, 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 Annexure-A1, so that the cases can be consolidated and jointly tried, which would avoid conflict of decisions and save precious judicial time.

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

(i) O.P (Div)No. 494/2021 is transferred from the Family Court, Ottapalam to the Family Court, Thiruvananthapuram

(ii) The parties would be at liberty to move the Family Court, Thiruvananthapuram and seek for consolidation and joint trial of all the cases between them.

(iii) The Registry shall forward a copy of this order to the Family Court, Ottapalam with instructions to forthwith transmit the records in Annexure-A1 to the Family Court, Thiruvananthapuram.

(iv) The Family Court, Thiruvananthapuram shall, immediately on the receipt of the records in Annexure-A1, post the case along with Annexure A2.