LAWS(KER)-2022-8-105

P. V. NEETHUMOL Vs. JINSON LAZAR

Decided On August 23, 2022
P. V. Neethumol Appellant
V/S
Jinson Lazar Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The transfer petition is filed under Sec.24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, to transfer O.P No.113/2022 (AnnexureA1) from the Family Court, Thodupuzha to the Family Court, Kannur.

(2.) The concise case of the petitioners, in the memorandum of transfer petition, is that: the 1st petitioner is the wife of the 1st respondent. The 2nd petitioner is the daughter born in their wedlock. The respondents 2 and 3 are the parents of the 1st respondent. Right from the inception of the marriage, the respondents used to mentally and physically harass the 1st petitioner. The 1st petitioner was constrained to file M.C No.3/2022 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Thodpuzha, as against the respondents, invoking the provisions of the Protection of Women from the Domestic Violence Act, 2005. A protection order was passed in favour of the petitioners, restraining the respondents from committing any act of physical, mental, verbal or emotional abuse and evicting them from the shared household. Thereafter, the 1st petitioner filed Annexure-A1 before the Family Court, Thodupuzha, against the respondents, inter alia, to declare that she has a right over the petition 'A & B' schedule properties, the matrimonial home. The 2nd respondent, in violation of the protection order passed by the learned Magistrate, physically abused the 1st petitioner. The 1st petitioner lodged a complaint against the respondents before the Karimannoor Police and Crime No.78/2022 was registered. Now, the petitioners are residing with the 1st petitioner's mother in Kannur. The petitioners are depending on the meager income of the 1st petitioner's mother, who is suffering from several diseases. The 2nd petitioner is aged 4 1/2 years. She has to take admission in a school for her studies. Even though the petitioners have filed an application for interim maintenance, the application has not been considered. Hence, Annexure-A1 may be transferred from the Family Court, Thodupuzha to the Family Court, Kannur.

(3.) The respondents have filed a counter affidavit denying the allegations in the transfer petition. They have, inter alia, contended that, the respondents 2 and 3 are senior citizens and are suffering from geriatric diseases. There is no valid ground to transfer Annexure-1. The 1st petitioner has filed four applications in Annexure-A1 before the Family Court, Thodupuzha, seeking various reliefs. The respondents have not violated the protection order passed by the learned Magistrate. In fact, the 1st petitioner assaulted the 2nd respondent and CMP 1088/2022 has been filed against the 1st petitioner before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-I, Thodupuzha, for the offences punishable under Ss. 323, 324 and 379 of the Indian Penal Code. The 1st petitioner has filed I.A 5/2022 in Annexure-A1, to secure the vacant possession of the residential building where the respondents are residing or to provide her an alternative accommodation at Thodupuzha. The 1st petitioner had initially stated that she was residing at Maria Bambina Ladies Home in Thodupuzha, on a monthly rent of Rs.5,000.00. Later, she has alleged that she is residing in an apartment by paying a monthly rent of Rs.15,000.00. In Annexure-A3 FIR lodged by the 1st petitioner, she has alleged that she is working in IMA, Thodupuzha. All the above facts establish that the 1st petitioner is permanently residing in Thodupuzha. The allegation that the petitioners are residing in Kannur is false. The petitioners have not produced any material to substantiate their address in Kannur. If at all she is residing at Kannur, it is only a temporary residence. This Court in Silpa Shaji v. Satheesh and others [2022 (1) KHC 691] has held that a mere temporary residence is not a ground for transfer. The transfer petition is filed only to harass the respondents. If the transfer petition is allowed, it would cause severe difficulties and hardship to the respondents, particularly the respondents 2 and 3, who are old and infirm. Hence, the transfer petition may be dismissed.