IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI THURSDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF APRIL 2025 / 13TH CHAITHRA, 1947 TR.P(C) NO. 65 OF 2025 OP NO.535 OF 2022 OF FAMILY COURT, KOTTAYAM PETITIONER: PRIYAMOL P J AGED 43 YEARS PEKKADANKUZHIYIL HOUSE, VEERPAD P.O, IRITTY, KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN - 670704 BY ADVS. PRASANTH K.T. NIKHILA SOMAN ASHALY TEKEYIL ANIERY K.P.AMRUTHA T.O.DEEPA RESPONDENT: SAM KURUVILA AGED 51 YEARS S/O P.C. KURUVILA, EVANGELIST, RESIDING AT CHEMBAKASSERIL HOUSE, PULIKKALKAVALA P.O, VAZHOOR, CHANGANASSERY TALUK, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT., PIN - 686515 THIS TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03.04.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: TRPC 65/2025 -2- 2025:KER:30086 O R D E R (Dated this the 3 rd day of April, 2025) This Transfer Petition has been filed seeking transfer of OP No.535/2022, pending before the Family Court, Ettumanoor, to the Family Court, Thalassery. 2. The petitioner is the wife of the respondent. The petitioner filed O.P No.838/2024 before the Family Court, Thalassery, seeking divorce. OP No.535/2022 was filed by the respondent before the Family Court, Ettumanoor, for restitution of conjugal rights. 3. The counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner and her children are residing at her parental home at lritty in Kannur District. The petitioner is unemployed, and having no means for maintenance. The petitioner will be put to great hardship if she is forced to attend the proceedings before the Family Court, Ettumanoor and also, she has to face significant travel expenses. In such circumstances, she prays for a transfer. TRPC 65/2025 -3- 2025:KER:30086 4. Notice issued from this Court has been served on the respondent, and none appeared. Thus it can be seen that the averments in the Transfer Petition stand unchallenged, which entitles the petitioner an order from this Court. 5. 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 and another [(2001)10 SCC 41)], Mona Aresh Goel v. Aresh 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 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 while deciding a petition for transfer, and in such cases, transfer has been effected. TRPC 65/2025 -4- 2025:KER:30086 6. Thus, in the light of the uncontroverted averments in the memorandum of Transfer Petition, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, to avoid multiplicity of proceedings, and the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the afore-cited decisions, I am inclined to allow this transfer petition. In the result, OP No.535/2022, before the Family Court, Ettumanoor, is withdrawn and transferred to the Family Court, Thalassery. The Family Court, Ettumanoor, shall immediately transfer the records to the Family Court, Thalassery. On receipt of the records, the Family Court, Thalassery, shall issue notice to the parties and dispose of the case in accordance with law. Sd/- BASANT BALAJI JUDGE JS TRPC 65/2025 -5- 2025:KER:30086 APPENDIX OF TR.P(C) 65/2025 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure-A1 THE TRUE COPY OF PETITION O.P.NO.535/2022 OF THE HON'BLE FAMILY COURT KOTTAYAM AT ETTUMANOOR