MONISHA C.S Vs. ARSHAKNATH C.P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The transfer petition is filed under Sec.24 of the Code of Civil Procedure to transfer OP No.85/2020 (Annexure-2) from the Family Court, Kozhikode, to the Family Court, Ernakulam.

(2.) The petitioner's case, in brief, in the memorandum of transfer petition is that, she is the wife of the respondent. The respondent has filed the above original petition, seeking a decree for restitution of conjugal rights. The petitioner is a serial artist and is residing in a rental house at Ernakulam. After her marriage with the respondent, she was residing at Kozhikode. The respondent has treated her with matrimonial cruelty. Even though efforts were made for rapprochement, the same failed. Hence, the petitioner filed OP Nos.322/2019 and 532/2019, against the respondent, before the Family Court, Kalpetta, for a decree of divorce and a decree for return of money and gold ornaments. Immediately, thereafter, the respondent filed Annexure-2. Due to the harassment of the respondent, the petitioner had to shift her residence to Ernakulam as evidenced by Annexure-3 rental agreement. She has filed MC No.33/2021 before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Kakkanad, against the respondent, invoking the provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act. The petitioner has withdrawn OP No.322/2019 filed before the Family Court, Kalpetta and filed OP No.2717/2021 before the Family Court, Ernakulam, for a decree of divorce. As the petitioner is presently residing in Ernakulam and is only 27 years of age, it would be difficult for her to contest Annexure-2 before the Family Court, Kozhikode. Hence the transfer petition.

(3.) The respondent has filed a counter affidavit denying the allegations in the transfer petition. He has contended that Annexure-3 rental agreement is executed only for the purpose of conferring jurisdiction of the Family Court, Ernakulam. The petitioner is a serial artist and is permanently residing at Chennai. The address shown in Ernakulam is only a temporary residence. The petitioner is a native of Wayanad. She herself had filed OP Nos.322/2019 and 532/2019 before the Family Court, Kalpetta. The said cases have been dismissed. The respondent has filed Annexure-2, seeking a decree for restitution of conjugal rights. This Court in Silpa Shaji vs. Satheesh K.S [ 2022 (1) KHC 691] has held that a temporary residence is not sufficient to transfer a case from one Court to another. Hence the transfer petition may be dismissed.