Tenetowl LogoTenetowl
High Court of KeralaSingle JudgeTransfer petitions allowed; O.P.Nos. 779/2022 a...

Pushpaja v. Babu Mangatt

Case / Petition Number:Tr.P.(C) Nos. 544 & 545/2022

Case Details & Bench

Court
High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges
  • C.S. Dias
Judgment Date
2022-12-07
Court Decision / Holding
The transfer petitions are allowed. The O.P.Nos. 779/2022 and 570/2022 are transferred from the Family Court, Malappuram to the Family Court, Palakkad. The parties may seek consolidation and joint trial of all proceedings. The respondent may seek dispensation of personal appearance in Palakkad. The Registry is to transmit the records to Palakkad and the Palakkad court shall post these cases with MC No. 145/2022. The order emphasizes welfare considerations and judicial efficiency in permitting consolidation.
Final Disposition
Transfer petitions allowed; O.P.Nos. 779/2022 and 570/2022 transferred from Malappuram to Palakkad; consolidation with MC 145/2022; liberty to move for dispensation of personal appearance; records to be transmitted to Palakkad; Palakkad to post with MC 145/2022.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

  • PUSHPAJA

Respondents

  • BABU MANGATT

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

  • • Premchand M.
  • • K. Anitha John
  • • Prameela Kumari B.
  • • Sreeraj M.D.
  • • A.S. Sooraj

Counsels for Respondents

  • • C. Dinesh
  • • Reshmi Viju

Case Synopsis & Summary

This is a common High Court of Kerala order by Justice C. S. Dias disposing of two transfer petitions (Tr.P(C) Nos. 544/2022 and 545/2022) filed by Pushpaja, wife of Babu Mangatt, seeking transfer of two Family Court matters from Malappuram to Palakkad so they can be consolidated with MC No. 145/2022 filed by the same wife before Palakkad. The petitions pertain to matrimonial disputes involving cruelty, non-maintenance and related reliefs, with the wife alleging she and their daughter faced cruelty and neglect. The respondent-husband has opposing the relief in separate proceedings. The Court recalls that transfer of matrimonial disputes is governed by settled law, citing Sumitha Sing and several subsequent decisions, which emphasize the convenience of the wife and children as the guiding principle in such transfers. It notes that the petitioner already filed MC No. 145/2022 before Palakkad and the respondent is contesting that action there, making consolidation sensible to save judicial time and avoid conflicting outcomes. After considering the pleadings, the totality of circumstances, and Section 24 CPC, the Court grants transfer of OP Nos. 779/2022 and 570/2022 to Palakkad, allows consolidation with MC 145/2022, and permits the parties to seek dispensation of personal appearance. It also directs the registry to transmit records to Palakkad and post the consolidated matter accordingly, reflecting a welfare- and efficiency-driven approach.

Provisions of Law Cited

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Section 24

Legal Doctrines & Maxims

  • Convenience of the woman and children as the governing factor in transfer of matrimonial disputes

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioner submits that transfer is warranted to Palakkad in order to consolidate all matrimonial proceedings, including MC No. 145/2022 filed in Palakkad, given the petitioner’s residence and travel hardship from Ottapalam to Palakkad. The petitioner relies on settled law (Sumitha Sing and related decisions) holding that the convenience of the wife and children should guide transfer decisions and that consolidation would prevent conflicting outcomes and save judicial time under Section 24 CPC.

Contentions of Respondents

The document does not provide explicit detailing of the respondents’ pleadings in the transfer petitions within the order. It is noted that the respondent has filed OP Nos. 779/2022 and 570/2022 in Malappuram and that the respondent contests the Palakkad proceedings; the court nonetheless grounds its decision on welfare-based transfer jurisprudence and consolidation, as well as the petitioner’s earlier filing in Palakkad.

Cited Precedents (7)

Case NameCitationTreatmentExplanation
Sumitha Sing—PositiveCited as establishing the governing principle to look at convenience of the woman and children in transfer of matrimonial disputes.
V. Kumar Sanjay and another(2001)10 SCC 41PositiveListed among leading authorities underpinning transfer/welfare principles applicable to matrimonial matters.
Mona Aresh Goel v. Aresh Satya Goel(2000) 9 SCC 255PositiveCited for welfare/transfer jurisprudence in matrimonial context.
Vaishali Shridhar Jagtap v. Shridhar Vishwanath JagtapAIR 2016 SC 3584PositiveSupreme Court authority cited in relation to transfer principles and welfare considerations.
Santhini V. Vijaya Venkatesh(2017) 4 KLT 415 (SC)PositiveSC decision cited for transfer/matrimonial dispute governance.
N.C.V. Aiswarya v. A.S. Sharavana Karthik Shas(2022) 5 KHC 185PositiveKerala High Court decision cited in the transfer/welfare framework.
Valsal Nisha v. Rajesh Soman Nair(2020) 8 KLR 475PositiveKerala High Court authority cited in context of transfer and welfare.

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 Pushpaja v. Babu Mangatt 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 7[TH] DAY OF DECEMBER 2022 / 16TH AGRAHAYANA, 1944 ``` ## `TR.P(C) NO. 544 OF 2022` ``` OP 779/2022 OF FAMILY COURT, MALAPPURAM ``` ## `PETITIONER/RESPONDENT:` ``` PUSHPAJA, AGED 50 YEARS W/O. BABU MANGATT, KARIYATTIL HOUSE, KULUKKALLOOR, CHUNDAMPATTA DESAM, OTTAPPALAM TALUK, PRESENTLY RESIDING AT VISHNU SADAN HOUSE, VENKITESHAPURAM COLONY, PUTHOOR, PALAKKAD – 678001. ``` ``` BY ADVS.PREMCHAND M. K.ANITHA JOHN PRAMEELA KUMARI B. SREERAJ M.D. A.S.SOORAJ ``` ## `RESPONDENT/PETITIONER:` ``` BABU MANGATT, AGED 60 YEARS S/O. P.B.NEDUNGADI, OASIS RESIDENCY, KAVUMPADY, MELE ARIPRA P.O.,THIROORKKAD VILLAGE, PERINTHALMANNA TALUK, MALAPPURAM – 679321. ``` ``` BY ADVS.C.DINESH RESHMI VIJU ``` ``` THIS TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07.12.2022, ALONG WITH Tr.P(C).545/2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` ``` Tr.P.(C)Nos.544 & 545/2022 ``` ``` -:2:- ``` ## `IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM` ## `PRESENT` ``` THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS WEDNESDAY, THE 7[TH] DAY OF DECEMBER 2022 / 16TH AGRAHAYANA, 1944 ``` ## `TR.P(C) NO. 545 OF 2022` ``` OP 570/2022 OF FAMILY COURT, MALAPPURAM ``` ## `PETITIONER/RESPONDENT:` ``` PUSHPAJA AGED 50 YEARS W/O. BABU MANGATT, KARIYATTIL HOUSE, KULUKKALLOOR, CHUNDAMPATTA DESAM, OTTAPPALAM TALUK, PRESENTLY RESIDING AT VISHNU SADAN HOUSE, VENKITESHAPURAM COLONY, PUTHOOR, VENKITESHAPURAM COLONY, PUTHOOR, PALAKKAD - 678001. ``` ``` BY ADVS.PREMCHAND M. K.ANITHA JOHN PRAMEELA KUMARI B. SREERAJ M.D. A.S.SOORAJ ``` ## `RESPONDENT/PETITIONER:` ``` BABU MANGATT AGED 60 YEARS S/O.P.B. NEDUNGADI, OASIS RESIDENCY, KAVUMPADY, MELE ARIPRA P.O, THIROORKKAD VILLAGE, PERINTHALMANNA TALUK, MALAPPURAM - 679321. ``` ``` BY ADVS.C.DINESH RESHMI VIJU ``` ``` THIS TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07.12.2022, ALONG WITH Tr.P(C).544/2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` ``` Tr.P.(C)Nos.544 & 545/2022 ``` ``` -:3:- ``` Dated this the 7[th] day of December, 2022 ## **C O M M O N O R D E R** As the transfer petitions are between the same parties, they are being disposed of by this common order. 2. Transfer petitions are filed by the wife to transfer O.P.Nos.779 & 570/2022 filed by the respondent/husband from the Family Court, Malappuram to the Family Court, Palakkad. 3. The common case of the petitioner in both the transfer petitions is, she is the wife of the respondent. They have a daughter born in the wedlock. The petitioner was treated with cruelty by the respondent, who has also refused to maintain the petitioner and his daughter. The petitioner has filed M.C.No.145/2022 before the Family Court, Palakkad, against the respondent, for an order of maintenance. As a counter blast to the above proceeding, the respondent has filed ``` Tr.P.(C)Nos.544 & 545/2022 ``` ``` -:4:- ``` O.P.Nos.779 & 570/2022, against the petitioner, before the Family Court, Malappuram, for a decree for restitution of conjugal rights and decree to declare a document null and void. The respondent is contesting M.C.No.145/2022 before the Family Court, Palakkad. It would be extremely difficult for the petitioner to travel from her parental home at Ottapalam to the Family Court, Palakkad. On a comparison of the relative hardship between the parties, due weightage and preference has to be given to the petitioner. Hence, the transfer petitions. 4. Heard; Sri. M. Premchand, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri. C. Dinesh, 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** ``` Tr.P.(C)Nos.544 & 545/2022 ``` ``` -:5:- ``` **V. Kumar Sanjay and another** [(2001)10 SCC 41)], **Mona Aresh Goel V. Aresh Satya Goel** [(2000) 9 SCC 255], **Vaishali Shridhar Jagtap V. Shridhar Vishwanath Jagtap** [AIR 2016 SC 3584], **Santhini V. Vijaya Venkatesh** [2017 (4) KLT 415 (SC)], **N.C.V. Aiswarya v. A.S. Sharavana Karthik Sha** [2022(5) KHC 185] and **Valsal Nisha v. Rajesh Soman Nair** [2020(8) KLR 475]. 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 and the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the fact that petitioner has already filed M.C.No.145/2022 before the Family Court, Palakkad and the respondent is contesting the proceeding before the said court, I am ``` Tr.P.(C)Nos.544 & 545/2022 ``` ``` -:6:- ``` inclined to exercise the discretionary powers of this Court under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, and order the transfer of O.P.Nos.779 & 570/2022, so that all the cases between the parties can be consolidated and jointly tried, which would save the precious judicial time and avoid conflict of decisions. In the result, the transfer petitions are allowed as follows: - (i) Tr.P(C) Nos.544 & 545/2022 are allowed by ordering the transfer of O.P.Nos.779 & 570/2022, from the Family Court, Malappuram to the Family Court, Palakkad. - (ii) The parties would be at liberty to move the Family Court, Palakkad and seek for consolidation and joint trial of all the proceedings between them. - (iii) The respondent would be at liberty to move the Family Court, Palakkad and file appropriate application seeking for dispensation of his personal appearance. ``` Tr.P.(C)Nos.544 & 545/2022 ``` ``` -:7:- ``` - (iv) The Registry shall forthwith forward a copy of the common order to the Family Court, Malappuram with instructions to transmit the records in O.P.Nos.779 & 570/2022 to the Family Court, Palakkad. - (v) The Family Court, Palakkad shall, immediately on receipt of the records in the above two cases, post the case along with M.C.No.145/2022. Sd/- ## **C.S.DIAS,JUDGE** DST/07.12.22 //True copy/ P.A.To Judge ``` Tr.P.(C)Nos.544 & 545/2022 ``` ``` -:8:- ``` ## `APPENDIX OF TR.P(C) 544/2022` ``` PETITIONER ANNEXURES ANNEXURE ATRUE COPY OF THE M.C.NO. 145/2022 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT PALAKKAD DATED 27/06/2022. ANNEXURE BTRUE COPY OF OP NO.779/2022 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, PALAKKAD DATED 12/07/2022. ``` ## `RESPONDENT’S ANNEXURE:` ``` ANNEXURE R1(A)TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL CERTIFICATE DATED 27.09.2022 ISSUED FROM COMTRUST, CHARITABLE TRUST EYE HOSPITAL, CALICUT ``` ``` Tr.P.(C)Nos.544 & 545/2022 ``` ``` -:9:- ``` ## `APPENDIX OF TR.P(C) 545/2022` ``` PETITIONER ANNEXURES ANNEXURE ATRUE COPY OF THE M.C. NO. 145/2022 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT PALAKKAD DATED 27.06.2022. ANNEXURE BTRUE COPY OF OP NO. 570/2022 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, PALAKKAD DATED 24.05.2022. ``` ``` RESPONDENT’S ANNEXURE NIL ```