High Court of KeralaSingle Judge2018-02-23Transfer petitions disposed of with directions:...

Tr.P.(C) Nos. 103, 104, 105 of 2018 and Tr.P.(C) No. 835 of 2017

Case / Petition Number:Tr.P.(C) Nos. 103/2018, 104/2018, 105/2018 and 835/2017

Case Details & Bench

Court: High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges: Alexander Thomas
Judgment Date: 2018-02-23
Court Decision / Holding: The court transfers O.P. No.64/2016, O.P. No.225/2016, and O.P. No.226/2016 from Family Court, Chavara to Family Court, Kollam. O.P. No.1278/2014 (1078/2017) remains before Family Court, Kollam and is not transferred. Tr.P.(C) No. 835/2017 is declined. The Family Court, Kollam shall transmit the case papers, issue notices, and proceed as per law. Parties may move for joint trial or mediation; exemptions from personal appearance may be granted at the Court’s discretion, with advocates present. The petitions are finally disposed of with directions for consolidated handling and mediation to resolve the disputes amicably.
Final Disposition: Transfer petitions disposed of with directions: O.P. Nos. 64/2016, 225/2016, 226/2016 are transferred to Family Court, Kollam; O.P. 1278/2017 remains in Kollam; Tr.P.(C) No. 835/2017 declined; papers to be transmitted; mediation encouraged; possibility of joint trial upon proper application.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

Sheeja R.

Respondents

KP Rajendran Pillai

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

• Sri M. Rajesh

Counsels for Respondents

• Sri M. Dinesh

Case Synopsis & Summary

This is a Transfer Petition (Civil) under Section 24 CPC before the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam concerning matrimonial proceedings. The wife-petitioner seeks transfer of O.P. Nos. 64/2016, 225/2016, and 226/2016 from Family Court, Chavara to Family Court, Kollam, to facilitate coordinated adjudication and justice. A fourth suit, O.P. 1278/2014 (renumbered 1278/2017), filed by the husband in Kollam, was not transferred to Chavara. The petitions explain how four litigations arose between the spouses; three were transferred to Chavara, leaving one before Kollam. Counsel for the wife contends that all four matters should be heard together in the same court; the husband’s counsel restricts the plea to consolidation in a single court and even suggests personal exemptions may be granted, if required. The court cites Apex Court precedents (Sumitha Singh; Rajwinder Kaur; Mona Aresh Goel; Vaishali Shridhar Jagtap) emphasizing that inconvenience to the wife warrants special consideration in family court transfers. The court, noting these authorities, favors the wife’s plea for transfer to Kollam, while declining the husband’s request in Tr.P(C) No.835/2017. Papers are to be transmitted, notices issued, and mediation encouraged; joint trial may be considered on application. The transfer petitions are disposed of with directions for coordinated management of the four matters.

Provisions of Law Cited

Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908

Legal Doctrines & Maxims

In the interest of justice

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The applicant-wife seeks to consolidate four matrimonial proceedings by transferring O.P. 64/2016, 225/2016, and 226/2016 from Family Court, Chavara to Family Court, Kollam, arguing that a single court would ensure coherent management, consistency in orders, and avoid conflicting directions. She relies on High Court and Supreme Court precedents which emphasize the inconvenience to a wife as a factor in transfer decisions and advocates expedited mediation to amicably resolve disputes. The proposal anticipates joint trial if the parties consent or apply for it, and requests exemption from personal appearances if practicable, with judges’ oversight to maintain progress.

Contentions of Respondents

The respondent-husband agrees that a single forum could be advantageous but contends that the four matters can be heard in Kollam or Chavara, and that his main objective is to have all proceedings before a single court, with a possible exemption from personal appearance. He asserts no strong objection to Kollam as the transfer venue if a joint-trial arrangement is possible and personal exemptions can be granted where proper, provided such arrangements do not prejudice the proceedings or delay the resolution of issues.

Cited Precedents (4)

Case Name	Citation	Treatment	Explanation
Sumitha Singh v. Kumar Sanjay & Anr.	(2001) 10 SCC 41	Positive	Cited for the principle that inconvenience to the wife in transfer cases should be given special consideration, supporting the petitioners’ request for transfer to a single court.
Rajwinder Kaur v. Balwinder Singh	(2003) 11 SCC 726	Positive	Affirms favorable treatment to a wife’s convenience in family court transfers, reinforcing the decision to consolidate proceedings.
Mona Aresh Goel v. Aresh Satya Goel	(2000) 9 SCC 255	Positive	Supports prioritizing the wife’s convenience in transfer arrangements to ensure coherent adjudication.
Vaishali Shridhar Jagtap v. Shridhar Vishwanath Jagtap	AIR 2016 SC 3584	Positive	Reiterates the policy of considering inconvenience to the wife in transfer orders, aiding the court’s reasoning to favor Kollam as the venue.

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 Tr.P.(C) Nos. 103, 104, 105 of 2018 and Tr.P.(C) No. 835 of 2017 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 ALEXANDER THOMAS** **FRIDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF FEBRUARY 2018 / 4TH PHALGUNA, 1939** **Tr.P(C).No. 103 of 2018** **-----------------------** **TO TRANSFER OP 64/2016 OF FAMILY COURT, CHAVARA TO FAMILY COURT, KOLLAM. ......** ## **PETITIONER:** **----------** **SHEEJA R., AGED 50 YEARS, D/O.J.RATNAMMA, SHAJI BHAVAN, MYLAKKAD P.O., ADICHANALLOOR VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT.** **BY ADV.SRI.M.RAJESH** **RESPONDENT:** **-----------** **KP RAJENDRAN PILLAI, AGED 64 YEARS, S/O.PARAMESWARAN PILLAI, RESIDING AT RS BHAVAN, CHATHANNOOR P.O., MEENADU VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT - 691 572.** **BY ADV.SRI.M. DINESH** **THIS TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23-02-2018 ALONG WITH TPC.835/2017 & CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:** **mbr/** ## **Tr.P(C).No. 103 of 2018** ## **-----------------------------** ## **APPENDIX** ## **PETITIONERS' ANNEXURES: -----------------------** |**ANNEXURE 1 :**|**TRUE COPY OF THE ORIGINAL PETITION FILED BEFORE**| |---|---| ||**THE FAMILY COURT, CHAVARA AS OP.NO.64/2016.**| |**ANNEXURE 2 :**|**TRUE COPY OF THE ORIGINAL PETITION FILED BEFORE**| ||**THE FAMILY COURT, CHAVARA AS OP.NO.226/2016.**| |**ANNEXURE 3 :**|**TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FILED BY THE RESPONDENT**| ||**BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT CHAVARA IS OP.NO.225/2016.**| |**ANNEXURE 4 :**|**TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FILED BY THE RESPONDENT**| ||**BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, KOLLAM AS OP.NO.1278/2014.**| |**ANNEXURE 5 :**|**TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL CERTIFICATE DATED 12.2.2018**| ||**ISSUED BY THE SENIOR MEDICAL OFFICER, GOVT DISTRICT HOSPITAL,**| ||**VARKALA.**| |**RESPONDENTS'**|**ANNEXURES:**<br>**NIL**| |**----------------------**|| ||**/TRUE COPY/**| ||**P.S.TO JUDGE**| |**mbr/**|| |**06.03.3018.**|| ## **ALEXANDER THOMAS, J** . ------------------------------------------------- Tr.P.(C) Nos. 103, 104, 105 of 2018 and Tr.P.(C) No. 835 of 2017 ------------------------------------------------Dated this the 23[rd] day of February, 2018 ## **O R D E R** ## The main prayer in Tr.P.(C) No.103/2018 filed under Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure is as follows : “For the facts and reasons stated in the above petition it is most humbly prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to transfer the O.P. No.64/2016 pending before the Family Court, Chavara to Family Court, Kollam, in the interest of justice.” 2. The main prayer in Tr.P.(C) No.104/2018 filed under ## Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure is as follows : “For the facts and reasons stated in the above petition it is most humbly prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to transfer the O.P. No.226/2016 pending before the Family Court, Chavara to Family Court, Kollam, in the interest of justice.” 3. The main prayer in Tr.P.(C) No.105/2018 filed under ## Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure is as follows : “For the facts and reasons stated in the above petition it is most humbly prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to transfer the O.P. No.225/2016 pending before the Family Court, Chavara to Family Court, Kollam, in the interest of justice.” 4. The main prayer in Tr.P.(C) No.835/2017 filed under ## Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure is as follows : Tr.P.(C) :103, 104,105 of 2018 and Tr.P.(C) No. 835 of 2017 ## -:2:- “Pass an order transferring O.P. No.1278/2014 pending before the Family Court, Kollam to Family Court, Chavara post along with O.P. No.64/2016, O.P. No.225/2016, O.P. No.226/2016 pending before the Family Court, Chavara and for joint trial.” 5. The petitioner in Tr.P.(C) Nos.103, 104 & 105 of 2018 (who is the respondent in Tr.P.(C) No.835 of 2017) is the wife of the respondent therein (who is also the petitioner in Tr.P.(C) No.835 of 2017). Difference of opinion between the parties have led to matrimonial disputes which in turn has led to the initiation of litigative proceedings between them. Initially there are four litigative proceedings between the parties before the Family Court, Kollam, out of which three of them were transferred to Family Court, Chavara consequent to the establishment of new Family Court at Chavara in Kollam District. They were renumbered as O.P. No.64/2016, O.P. No.225/2016, O.P. No.226/2016 and is pending before the Family Court, Chavara. 6. It appears that the 4[th] case in question, O.P. No.1278/2014 filed by the respondent/husband seeking for recovery of money, gold ornaments etc pending before the Family Court, Kollam was omitted to be transferred to Family Court, Chavara. That was how Tr.P.(C) :103, 104,105 of 2018 and Tr.P.(C) No. 835 of 2017 -:3:- the present O.P. No.1278/2017 which is the subject matter of Tr.P. (C) No.835/2017 filed by the husband happened to continue at Family Court, Kollam. 7. Tr.P.(C) Nos. 103, 104 & 105 of 2018 filed by the wife are concerned with the transfer of O.P. No.64/2016, O.P. No.225/2016, O.P. No.226/2016 from Family Court, Chavara to Family Court, Kollam. Now out of the four litigative proceedings, three are now at Family Court, Chavara and one case is at Family Court, Kollam. It is only in the interest of justice of both sides that all the four cases are conducted before the same Family Court as it would give well co-ordinated litigative management for both sides. 8. Sri. M. Dinesh, learned counsel for the respondent submits fairly on the basis of instructions from his party that the only limited plea of the husband is that all the four proceedings should be before the same court and that it could be either before the Family Court, Chavara or Family Court, Kollam and that if the wife insists that all the cases should be before the Family Court, Kollam, he has no serious objection to that course of action, Tr.P.(C) :103, 104,105 of 2018 and Tr.P.(C) No. 835 of 2017 -:4:- provided this Court directs that necessary orders may be passed by the Family Court in the matter of personal exemption to his party. Learned counsel appearing for the wife welcomes the above said suggestion made by learned counsel appearing for the husband. 9. In the judgments of the Apex Court as in _**Sumitha Singh v. Kumar Sanjay & Anr.**_ reported in (2001) 10 SCC 41, _**Rajwinder Kaur v. Balwinder Singh**_ reported in (2003) 11 SCC 726, _**Mona Aresh Goel v. Aresh Satya Goel**_ , reported in (2000) 9 SCC 255, _**Vaishali Shridhar Jagtap v. Shridhar Vishwanath Jagtap**_ , reported in AIR 2016 SC 3584, etc. it has been held that in the matter of transfer of cases from one Family Court to another, inconvenience to wife should be given special consideration by the courts, etc. 10. In the light of the above said aspects and in view of the above said Apex Court rulings, this Court is inclined to consider favourably the plea made by the wife in Tr.P.(C) Nos. 103, 104 & 105 of 2018. Consequently, the plea made by the husband in Tr.P. (C) No.835/2017 is only to be declined. Tr.P.(C) :103, 104,105 of 2018 and Tr.P.(C) No. 835 of 2017 -:5:- 11. Accordingly, it is ordered in the interest of justice that O.P. No.64/2016, O.P. No.225/2016, O.P. No.226/2016 now pending on the file of the Family Court, Chavara will stand transferred to the Family Court, Kollam. As the prayer in Tr.P.(C) No. 835 of 2017 is to be declined, it is made clear that O.P. No.1278/2017 will continue to be before the Family Court, Kollam. The petitioner shall produce a certified copy of this order before the Family Court, Chavara and upon such receipt, that Court shall transmit the case papers and records in relation to O.P. No.64/2016, O.P. No.225/2016, O.P. No.226/2016 to the Family Court, Kollam. On receipt of the case papers, the Family Court, Kollam shall issue notices to the parties concerned and thereafter proceed with the matter in accordance with law. 12. It is made clear that the parties will be at liberty to make appropriate application before the Family Court, Kollam for joint trial of all the four matters in which case the said Court will consider such plea and pass necessary orders thereon in accordance with law. Tr.P.(C) :103, 104,105 of 2018 and Tr.P.(C) No. 835 of 2017 -:6:- 13. Taking note of the submissions made by the parties regarding the inconvenience faced by them, it is ordered in the interest of justice that it will be open to both parties to make appropriate applications for exemption from personal appearance before the Family Court, Kollam upon which, the said request may be considered favourably, provided the parties engage their respective advocates. However, it is made clear that the parties will have to appear before the Family Court at the time of counselling and mediation process, etc., as and when specifically so directed by the Family Court. 14. This Court would hope and trust that the mutual co-operation shown by the parties in the present cases before this Court, would should also be adopted by them in resolving the issues between them and the parties should seriously consider the option on mediatory efforts to settle their outstanding disputes. Accordingly, it is ordered that the Family Court, Kollam will immediately after receipt of the case papers will refer the parties for mediation process. So that all serious efforts are taken to ensure that all the outstanding disputes between the Tr.P.(C) :103, 104,105 of 2018 and Tr.P.(C) No. 835 of 2017 -:7:- spouses are amicably resolved through such alternate dispute resolution mechanism. With these observations and directions, this Transfer Petition (Civil) stands finally disposed of. Sd/- ## **ALEXANDER THOMAS, JUDGE** ttb