HONEY JOHN RAYMOND Vs. BONNIE MARWIN D SILVA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is filed by the wife seeking transfer of O.P. No.373 of 2010 from Family Court, Ernakulam to Family Court, Kollam. That is a petition filed by the respondent for restitution of conjugal rights. Petitioner who is a resident of Pallithottam, in Kollam District filed O.P. No.883 of 2009 in Family Court, Kollam against respondent for recovery of money, gold ornaments, etc. She states that she is staying with her parents at Pallithottam, in Kollam District along with her minor child. She finds it difficult to travel to Family Court, Ernakulam. Moreover O.P. No.883 of 2009 is pending in Family Court, Kollam and if the cases continued in two courts she has to attend both the courts. Hence she requested for transfer of the case from Family Court, Ernakulam to Family Court, Kollam.

(2.) Petition is opposed by respondent. It is stated that petitioner is working as a Teacher at Chalakkudy, in Thrissur District staying in a hostel at Chalakkudy. Hence it is not difficult for petitioner to attend Family Court, Ernakulam which is midway from her place of residence to place of employment. According to the learned counsel convenience of petitioner was also taken into account while filing O.P. No.373 of 2010 in Family Court, Ernakulam.

(3.) The Supreme Court in Sumitha Singh v. Kumar Sanjay and another (AIR 2002 SC 396) and Arti Rani v. Dharmendra Kumar Gupta ([2008] 9 SCC 353) has stated that while considering request for transfer of matrimonial proceedings convenience of the wife has to be looked into. That of course does not mean that inconvenience of the husband has to be ignored. It is not disputed that petitioner is working as Teacher in a private school at Chalakkudy. Leaned counsel states that petitioner cannot attend the courts every now and then since the school being a private school, she has to attend the school on Saturdays as well. It is stated that if the cases are tried in two courts she has to take leave for two days. It is true that in connection with the job petitioner has to go to Chalakkudy. I must note that she is staying in a hostel at Chalakkudy. Going to the school where she is working is different from going to the court. There, petitioner has to face the estranged husband and probably, his relatives also. In such a situation a young lady like petitioner requires assistance from her relatives who may have to accompany her. In the circumstances mere fact that petitioner is working in Chalakkudy is no reason to reject prayer for transfer of the case to Family Court, Kollam. Respondent has a contention that he has already filed objection in O.P. No.883 of 2009 in Family Court, Kollam and it is not necessary for him to appear in that court every now and then. Convenience of both parties require that the cases are consolidated in the same court. Inconvenience if any of respondent can be reduced to some extent by directing that he need appear only when his physical presence is required. Hence I am inclined to allow this petition. Resultantly, this petition is allowed in the following lines: