Tenetowl LogoTenetowl
High Court of KeralaSingle JudgeTransfer petitions allowed; two matrimonial pro...

Deepa S. v. Suresh P.

Case / Petition Number:Tr.P(C) Nos. 269 & 291/2022

Case Details & Bench

Court
High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges
  • C. S. Dias
Judgment Date
2023-01-04
Court Decision / Holding
Transfer petitions allowed. (i) Tr.P.(C) No.269/2022: OP(G&W) No.22/2021 transferred from Family Court, Kottarakkara to Family Court, Pathanamthitta. (ii) Tr.P.(C) No.291/2022: OP(HMA) No.530/2020 transferred from Family Court, Kottarakkara to Family Court, Pathanamthitta. (iii) Parties may move for consolidation and joint trial; (iv) Registry to transmit records to Pathanamthitta forthwith; (v) Pathanamthitta Family Court to issue notices on receipt of records.
Final Disposition
Transfer petitions allowed; two matrimonial proceedings to be transferred to Pathanamthitta Family Court; potential consolidation and timeline directions issued.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

  • Deepa S.

Respondents

  • Suresh P.

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

  • • A. Rajasimhan
  • • Vykhari K. U
  • • Nikhil A. Azeez

Counsels for Respondents

  • • Abhilash N
  • • Praveen K. Joy

Case Synopsis & Summary

Common order in Tr.P(C) Nos. 269/2022 and 291/2022 arises from matrimonial disputes between Deepa S. (wife/petitioner) and Suresh P. (husband/respondent). The wife seeks transfer of two Family Court proceedings – OP(G&W) No.22/2021 (custody/guardianship and welfare) and OP(HMA) No.530/2020 (divorce) – from the Family Court, Kottarakkara to the Family Court, Pathanamthitta. She contends she and her two minor children reside in Pathanamthitta and, with no person to accompany them to Kottarakkara, contesting the cases there would cause hardship to her and the children; consolidation and joint trial are sought where appropriate. The court notes that the law on transfer of matrimonial disputes is well-settled, citing Sumitha Sing v. Kumar Sanjay and others; Mona Aresh Goel v. Aresh Satya Goel; Vaishali Shridhar Jagtap v. Shridhar Vishwanath Jagtap; Santhini v. Vijaya Venkatesh; and Aiswarya N.C.V. v. A.S. Saravana Karthik Sha (N.C.V.) to emphasize that the convenience of the wife and children is the controlling factor. On the basis of uncontroverted pleadings, totality of facts, and the fact that the petitioner and two minor children reside in Pathanamthitta, the learned Judge exercises discretionary power under Section 24 CPC and allows the transfers: (i) OP(G&W) 22/2021 from Kottarakkara to Pathanamthitta; (ii) OP(HMA) 530/2020 from Kottarakkara to Pathanamthitta; (iii) liberty to seek consolidation/joint trial; (iv) records to Pathanamthitta; (v) notice to the parties. Argues for expeditious adjudication with welfare of children in mind.

Provisions of Law Cited

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Section 24

Legal Doctrines & Maxims

  • Convenience of the woman and children doctrine in transfer of matrimonial disputes

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioner contends that she and her two minor children reside within the jurisdiction of Pathanamthitta and face hardship in contesting custody and divorce proceedings from Kottarakkara. There is no person to accompany them if the proceedings remain in Kottarakkara, and transferring the cases to Pathanamthitta would align the forum with the family’s residence and welfare. Citing established Supreme Court and High Court jurisprudence (Sumitha Sing; Mona Aresh Goel; Vaishali Shridhar Jagtap; Santhini; Aiswarya/N.C.V.), the petitioner argues that convenience to the wife and children is the decisive factor in transfer of matrimonial proceedings, and that both cases should be consolidated for efficiency and fair adjudication. The pleadings are described as uncontroverted, and the totality of circumstances favors transfer under Section 24 CPC.

Contentions of Respondents

The document records the appearance of counsel for the respondents but does not detail their specific submissions in the common order. The record indicates that the matter was heard and that the court relied on the pleadings and on settled principles regarding transfer based on the convenience of the wife and children. The absence of a detailed enumeration of the respondents’ arguments in the order suggests that their contentions were not highlighted as controlling factors against transfer; the court nonetheless proceeded to grant the relief requested by the petitioner.

Cited Precedents (6)

Case NameCitationTreatmentExplanation
Sumitha Sing v. Kumar Sanjay and another2002 KHC 1889PositiveCited to support the proposition that the convenience of the wife and children governs transfer in matrimonial disputes.
Mona Aresh Goel v. Aresh Satya Goel2000 KHC 1835PositiveCited as authority for granting transfer based on welfare and convenience of the wife and children.
Vaishali Shridhar Jagtap v. Shridhar Vishwanath Jagtap2016 KHC 6489PositiveCited for the same principle in transfer jurisprudence.
Santhini v. Vijaya Venkatesh2017 (5) KHC 48PositiveCited to reinforce the transfer principle favoring convenience of spouse and children.
Aiswarya N.C.V. v. A.S. Saravana Karthik Sha2022 (5) KHC 185(SC)PositiveCited to underscore the convenience-based transfer framework (SC viewpoint cited in KHC context).
N.C.V. v. A.S. Saravana Karthik Sha2022 (5) KHC 185(SC)PositiveReiterates the convenience of woman and children principle in transfer of matrimonial matters.

Diagnostic Tool

Beta

Does this judgment govern your specific facts?

Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against Deepa S. v. Suresh P. and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

# `IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM` ## `PRESENT` ``` THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS WEDNESDAY, THE 4[TH] DAY OF JANUARY 2023 / 14TH POUSHA, 1944 ``` ``` TR.P(C) NO. 291 OF 2022 ``` ``` OPHMA 530/2020 OF FAMILY COURT, KOTTARAKKARA ``` ## `PETITIONER/RESPONDENT:` ``` DEEPA.S. AGED 41 YEARS W/O SURESH.P. DILEEP BHAVANAM, EZHAMKULAM, NEDUMAN.P.O., ADOOR, PATHANAMTHITTA , PIN - 691556 BY ADVS. A.RAJASIMHAN VYKHARI.K.U NIKHIL.A.AZEEZ ``` ## `RESPONDENT/PETITIONER:` ``` SURESH.P. S/O PRABHAKARAN, SURYASREE HOUSE, VENCHEMPU.P.O., KOLLAM, PIN - 691333 BY ADVS. ABHILASH N PRAVEEN K. JOY(P-337) ``` ``` THIS TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04.01.2023, ALONG WITH Tr.P(C).269/2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` Tr.P (C) Nos. 269 & 291/2022 -:2:- ## `IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM` ## `PRESENT` ``` THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS WEDNESDAY, THE 4[TH] DAY OF JANUARY 2023 / 14TH POUSHA, 1944 ``` ## `TR.P(C) NO. 269 OF 2022` ``` OPGW 22/2021 OF FAMILY COURT, KOTTARAKKARA ``` ## `PETITIONER/RESPONDENT:` ``` DEEPA.S. AGED 41 YEARS W/O SURESH.P. DILEEP BHAVANAM, EZHAMKULAM, NEDUMAN.P.O., ADOOR, PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN – 691556 ``` ``` BY ADVS.A.RAJASIMHAN VYKHARI.K.U NIKHIL.A.AZEEZ ``` ## `RESPONDENT/PETITIONER:` ``` SURESH.P. S/O PRABHAKARAN, SURYASREE HOUSE, VENCHEMPU.P.O., KOLLAM, PIN – 691333 ``` ``` BY ADVS.ABHILASH N PRAVEEN K. JOY(P-337) ``` ``` THIS TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04.01.2023, ALONG WITH Tr.P(C).291/2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` Tr.P (C) Nos. 269 & 291/2022 -:3:- Dated this the 4[th] day of January, 2023 ## **COMMON ORDER** As the transfer petitions arise out of the marital disputes between the same parties, they are being disposed of by this common order. 2. The transfer petitions are filed by the wife against the husband to transfer O.P. (G&W) No.22/2021 and O.P (HMA) No.530/2020 from the Family Court, Kottarakkara to the Family Court, Pathanamthitta. 3. The common case of the petitioner – wife in the transfer petitions is that, she is the wife of the respondent. They have two sons born in their wedlock. The children are in her custody. The respondent has refused to look after the petitioner and the children. The respondent has filed O.P (G&W) No.22/2021, for an order for the custody of the children and O.P(HMA) No.530/2020, for a decree of Tr.P (C) Nos. 269 & 291/2022 -:4:- divorce. There is no person to chaperone the petitioner and the children from Pathanamthitta to Kottarakkara, to contest the above two cases. On a comparison of the relative hardship, due preference and weightage is to be given to the petitioner and the children. Hence, the transfer petitions. 4. Heard; Sri.A.Rajasimhan, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri. N. Abhilash, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent. 5. The law with respect to transfer of proceedings, particularly matrimonial disputes, is no longer res-integra, in view of the categoric declaration of law by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in **Sumitha Sing V. Kumar Sanjay and another** [2002 KHC 1889], **Mona Aresh Goel V. Aresh Satya Goel** [2000 KHC 1835], **Vaishali Shridhar Jagtap V. Shridhar Vishwanath Jagtap** [2016 KHC 6489], **Santhini V. Vijaya Venkatesh** [2017 (5) KHC 48] and **Aiswarya** Tr.P (C) Nos. 269 & 291/2022 -:5:- **N.C.V. v. A.S. Saravana Karthik Sha** [2022 (5) KHC 185(SC)]. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that it is the convenience of the woman and children that has to be looked into, while ordering the transfer of a case from one Court to another. 6. In the light of the law laid down in the afore-cited decisions, the uncontroverted pleadings and materials on record, the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the fact the petitioner and her two minor children are residing within the jurisdiction of the Family Court, Pathanamthitta, I am inclined to exercise the discretionary powers of this Court under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 and order the transfer of the two cases. In the result, the transfer petitions are allowed as follows:- Tr.P (C) Nos. 269 & 291/2022 -:6:- - (i) Tr.P.(c) No.269/2022 is allowed by ordering the transfer of O.P (G&W) No.22/2021 is transferred from the Family Court, Kottarakkara to the Family Court, Pathanamthitta. - (ii) Tr.P.(c) No.291/2022 is allowed by ordering the transfer of O.P (HMA) No.530/2020 is transferred from the Family Court, Kottarakkara to the Family Court, Pathanamthitta. - (iii) The parties would be at liberty to move the Family Court, Pathanamthitta and seek for the consolidation and joint trial of all the cases between them. - (iv) The Registry shall forward a copy of this common order to the Family Court, Kottarakkara with instructions to forthwith transmit the records in the above two cases to the Family Court, Pathanamthitta. - (v) The Family Court, Pathanamthitta shall, immediately on the receipt of the records in Tr.P (C) Nos. 269 & 291/2022 -:7:- the above two cases, issue notice to the parties for their appearance. Sd/- ## **C.S.DIAS,JUDGE** DST/04.01.23 //True copy/ P.A.To Judge Tr.P (C) Nos. 269 & 291/2022 -:8:- ## `APPENDIX OF TR.P(C) 269/2022` ``` PETITIONER ANNEXURES AnnexureA1TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION IN OP(GW) NO. 22/2021 PENDING BEFORE THE FAMILKY COURT, KOTTARAKKARA ``` Tr.P (C) Nos. 269 & 291/2022 -:9:- ## `APPENDIX OF TR.P(C) 291/2022` ``` PETITIONER ANNEXURES AnnexureA1TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION IN OP(HMA) NO. 530/2020 PENDING BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, KOTTARAKKARA ```