RASMIDEVI R Vs. BALAMURUGAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER, wife seeks transfer of O.P(Div).No.1545 of 2010 from Family Court, Kottayam, at Ettumanoor to Family Court, Kollam. That petition is filed by the respondent seeking divorce. It is stated that petitioner is a resident of Kollam and that it is difficult for her to travel from Kollam to Ettumanoor. Financial difficulties is also stated to be a reason for seeking transfer of the case to the Family Court, Kollam. Another reason stated is that since the husband/respondent is at Kottayam, she has threat of danger to her life. Learned counsel for respondent while resisting the application contended that none of these grounds exist in that, petitioner is permanently staying in Bangalore in connection with her employment in the IBM, a multi national company at Bangalore . Hence existence of financial difficulty does not arise. Respondent is working at Dubai and no question of threat is therefore involved. It is also submitted by learned counsel that counseling of the parties is already over at Family Court, Kottayam at Ettumanoor and if before the report is submitted the case is transferred, again the parties may have to go for counseling.

(2.) THE Supreme Court in Sumitha Singh Vs. Sanjay Kumar & Another (AIR 2002 SC 396) and Arti Rani Lrs. Pinki Devi and Another Vs. Darmendra Kumar Gupta (2008 (9) SCC 353) has stated that while considering the request for transfer in matrimonial proceedings convenience of the wife has to be looked into. It is seen that petitioner, wife is aged about 30 years. Even if it is assumed that she is working at Bangalore, I must remember that her paternal home is at Kollam and hence it is convenient for her to go to Kollam if the case is transferred to Family Court, Kollam rather than herself either singly, or accompanied by relatives going to Family Court, Kottayam at Ettumanoor which involves expenses as well. Since respondent is now working at Dubai, it makes no difference whether the case is tried at Ettumanoor or Kollam. Having regard to the comparative hardship, I am inclined to think that request of petitioner has to be favoured. At the same time if counseling is already over at Family Court, Kottayam at Ettumanoor, records shall be send to the transferee Court with the report of the Counselor of that Court so that further counseling may not be required. Resultantly this petition is allowed in the following lines: