High Court of KeralaSingle Judge2018-02-15Transfer of O.P.880/2017 and O.P.881/2017 from ...

Tr.P.(C) Nos.34/2018 & 36/2018

Case / Petition Number:Tr.P(C).Nos.34/2018 & 36/2018

Case Details & Bench

Court: High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges: Alexander Thomas
Judgment Date: 2018-02-15
Court Decision / Holding: O.P.880/2017 and O.P.881/2017, pending on the file of the Family Court, Mavelikkara, will stand transferred to the Family Court at Alappuzha District. The Family Court, Mavelikkara, shall transmit the case papers and records to Alappuzha; notices shall be issued to both parties; parties may seek exemption from personal appearance if represented by counsel, with appearance for counselling as directed. The Transfer Petitions (Civil) are finally disposed of.
Final Disposition: Transfer of O.P.880/2017 and O.P.881/2017 from Family Court, Mavelikkara to Family Court, Alappuzha; transmit records; issue notices; allowance for exemption from personal appearance with counsel; final disposal of transfer petitions.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

MIRAZA ASHRAF
ASHRAF A.M.
SALEEMA BEEVI
MAVAHIB

Respondents

ANZIL

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

• Sri K. Najeeb
• Sri Jose Antony

Counsels for Respondents

• Sri K.K. Sathheesh

Case Synopsis & Summary

Tr.P.(C) Nos.34 and 36 of 2018 concern two transfer petitions filed by Miraza Ashraf and others seeking to transfer two matrimonial original petitions (OP Nos. 880/2017 and 881/2017) from the Family Court, Mavelikkara, to the Family Court, Alappuzha. The petitioners, who are the wife and family members of the husband, contended that ongoing litigation spans multiple venues and that their travel burden to attend proceedings at Mavelikkara is onerous; the husband resides near Alappuzha, where several cases are already pending, making transfer desirable for convenience and management. The respondent appeared through counsel in the petitions. The court cites Supreme Court jurisprudence (Sumitha Singh v. Kumar Sanjay & Anr.; Rajwinder Kaur v. Balwinder Singh; Mona Aresh Goel v. Aresh Satya Goel; Vaishali Shridhar Jagtap v. Shridhar Vishwanath Jagtap) recognizing that convenience to the wife should be given special consideration in transfers of Family Court cases and that consolidating related litigation in a single court reduces hardship for both parties. After examining the facts and authorities, the High Court, in the interest of justice, inclined to transfer the two OPs from Mavelikkara to Alappuzha. It directed the transcript of records, notices, and allowed exceptions from personal appearance if represented by advocates, while mandating appearance for counselling as directed. The petitions are thus disposed with transfer orders and accompanying directions.

Legal Doctrines & Maxims

Inconvenience to the wife in transfer of Family Court proceedings should be given special consideration
Consolidation of related matrimonial proceedings in a single Family Court to avoid hardship
Transfer of cases between Family Courts to promote justice and administrative efficiency

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioners argued that the matrimonial disputes involve five proceedings across two Family Courts, with three at Alappuzha and two at Mavelikkara. The wife’s travel burden from Ambalappuzha to Mavelikkara is substantial, and centralizing the matters in a single court would reduce hardship and improve efficiency. They relied on Supreme Court precedents emphasizing that inconvenience to the wife should be given special weight in transfer decisions.

Contentions of Respondents

The respondent was not represented in the written summary of the material, and the document records only that notice was not opposed by appearance; the court’s decision rests on the petitions and established precedents rather than a detailed contested argument from the respondent.

Cited Precedents (4)

Case Name	Citation	Treatment	Explanation
Sumitha Singh v. Kumar Sanjay & Anr.	(2001) 10 SCC 41	Positive	Cited to support the principle that inconvenience to the wife in transfer of Family Court proceedings should be given special consideration.
Rajwinder Kaur v. Balwinder Singh	(2003) 11 SCC 726	Positive	Cited as authority for giving weight to the wife’s inconvenience in transfer decisions.
Mona Aresh Goel v. Aresh Satya Goel	(2000) 9 SCC 255	Positive	Cited for the same principle of considering marital convenience in transfers.
Vaishali Shridhar Jagtap v. Shridhar Vishwanath Jagtap	AIR 2016 SC 3584	Positive	Cited to reinforce the principle that convenience of the wife is a relevant factor in transfer decisions.

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.34/2018 & 36/2018 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** **THURSDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2018 / 26TH MAGHA, 1939** **Tr.P(C).No. 34 of 2018** **(TO TRANSFER OP.NO.880/2017 OF FAMILY COURT,MAVELIKKARA TO FAMILY COURT, ALAPPUZHA)** **--------** ## **PETITIONER(S)/RESPONDENTS:** **1 MIRAZA ASHRAF, AGED 23, W/O.ANZIL AND D/O.ASHRAF, AREEPURATHU ARAFA MANZIL, KOMANA MURI, AMBALAPPUZHA P.O.** **2 ASHRAF A.M., AGED ABOUT 60, F/O.MIRAZA, AREEPURATHU ARAFA MANZIL, KOMANA MURI, AMBALAPPUZHA P.O.** **3 SALEEMA BEEVI, AGED ABOUT 50, W/O.ASHRAF A.M., AREEPURATHU ARAFA MANZIL, KOMANA MURI, AMBALAPPUZHA P.O.** **4 MAVAHIB, AGED ABOUT 38, S/O.ASHRAF, AREEPURATHU ARAFA MANZIL, KOMANA MURI, AMBALAPPUZHA P.O.** **BY ADVS.SRI.K.NAJEEB SRI.JOSE ANTONY** ## **RESPONDENT/PETITIONER:** **ANZIL, AGED 32, S/O.ALIKUNJU, KIZHAKKE ANJILITHARAYIL, PANOOR, PALLANA P.O., THRIKKUNNAPPUZHA VILLAGE, KARTHIKAPALLY TALUK, ALAPPUZHA, PIN-690 515, REPRESENTED BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER, ALIKUNJU, AGED 64, S/O.ABOOBAKER, KIZHAKKE ANJILITHARAYIL, PANOOR, PALLANA P.O., THRIKKUNNAPPUZHA VILLAGE, KARTHIKAPALLY TALUK, ALAPPUZHA, PIN-690 515.** **BY ADV. SRI.K.K.SATHEESH** **THIS TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15-02-2018, ALONG WITH TR.P(C).NO.36 OF 2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:** **sts 2/3/2018** ## **Tr.P(C).No. 34 of 2018** ## **APPENDIX** ## **PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES:** **ANNEXURE A1 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONERS IN OP.NO.880/2017 ON THE FILE OF FAMILY COURT, MAVELIKKARA.** **RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES: NIL** **/TRUE COPY/** **P.A.TO JUDGE** **sts 2/3/2018** ## **ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.** ---------------------------------------- ## Tr.P.(C) Nos.34 & 36 of 2018 ----------------------------------------Dated this the 15[th] day of February, 2018 ## _**O R D E R**_ The prayer in Tr.P.C.No.34 of 2018 is as follows : _“........ it is most humbly prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to transfer O.P.No.880/2017 pending before the Family Court, Mavelikkara to Family Court, Alappuzha.”_ The prayer in Tr.P.C.No.36 of 2018 is as follows : _“..... it is most humbly prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to transfer O.P.No.881/2017 pending before the Family Court, Mavelikkara to Family Court, Alappuzha.”_ 2. Heard Sri.K.Najeeb, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. Though notice process on the respondent in these cases has been duly completed, there is no appearance for that party. 3. The first petitioner is the wife of the respondent herein. Differences of opinion between the parties have led to matrimonial disputes. The respondent-husband has filed O.P.No.880 of 2017 (referred to as Annexure-A1 in Tr.P.(C) No.34 of 2018) before the Family Court, Mavelikkara, seeking realisation of money alleged to have been paid as mehar to the wife. The respondent-husband has also filed O.P.No.881 of 2017 (referred to as Annexure-A1 in Tr.P.(C) No.36 of 2018) before the Family Court, Mavelikkara, seeking restitution of : **:2::** Tr.P.(C) No.34/18 & 36/18 conjugal rights. The first petitioner-wife has filed O.P.No.288 of 2017 (for divorce), O.P.No.289 of 2017 (for return of gold ornaments and money) and Maintenance Case, M.C.No.34 of 2017 (for maintenance) before the Family Court, Alappuzha. The petitioners would contend that they are now residing at Komanamuri, Near Ambalapuzha, Alappuzha District, and they find it extremely difficult to travel all the way from their residential place at Ambalapuzha to attend to the abovesaid Family Court proceedings before the Family Court, Mavelikkara. It is also pointed out that the respondent-husband is residing near Karthikapally, Alappuzha, and that he will not have much difficulties in travelling all the way from his residential locality to Alappuzha, if the above cases are transferred as sought for in these Transfer Petitions. 4. 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 caused to the wife should be given special consideration by the courts. 5. Now it is on record that out of the five litigative proceedings between the spouses, three are at Alappuzha and two are at : **:3::** Tr.P.(C) No.34/18 & 36/18 Mavelikkara and it is only in the interest of both sides that all the litigations are conducted in the same Family Court, as otherwise it will create unnecessary hardships and difficulties for both parties in the management of the litigations. In the light of the abovesaid aspects and more particularly in the light of the abovesaid legal position by the Apex Court, this Court is inclined to consider the plea for transfer. 6. Taking into account the facts and circumstances disclosed in this petition, this Court is inclined to consider the plea for transfer of O.P.Nos.880 and 881 of 2017 on the file of the Family Court, Mavelikkara to the Family Court at Alappuzha. Accordingly, it is ordered that O.P.Nos.880 and 881 of 2017 pending on the file of the Family Court, Mavelikkara, will stand transferred to the file of the Family Court at Alappuzha District. The petitioner will produce a certified copy of this order before the Family Court, Mavelikkara without further delay. Upon receipt of the copy of the order, the Family Court, Mavelikkara, will take steps to ensure that the case papers and case records in relation to O.P.No.880 of 2017 and O.P.No.881 of 2017 pending on the file of that court are transmitted to the Family Court at Alappuzha. After receiving the case papers and case records in relation to O.P.No.880 of 2017 and O.P.No.881 of 2017, the Family Court at Alappuzha, will issue notices to both parties and proceed further with the matter, in accordance with law. 7. In order to alleviate the difficulties of the parties for : **:4::** Tr.P.(C) No.34/18 & 36/18 personally attending before the Family Court, it is ordered in the interest of justice that it will be open to both the parties to make appropriate applications for exemption from personal appearance before the Family Court, upon which the said request may be considered favourably, provided the parties are represented through 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. With these observations and directions, these Transfer Petitions (Civil) will stand finally disposed of. **ALEXANDER THOMAS JUDGE** csl : **:5::** Tr.P.(C) No.34/18 & 36/18 ## ALEXANDER THOMAS, J. ---------------------------------------------------------- Tr.P.(C).Nos.34 & 36 of 2018 and I.A.No.123 of 2018 in Tr.P.(C) No.34 of 2018 & I.A.No.128 of 2018 in Tr.P.(C) No.36 of 2018 ----------------------------------------------------------Dated this the 17[th] day of January, 2018 ## _**O R D E R**_ Admit these Transfer Petitions (Civil). 2. Issue notice to the respondent in these two cases by speed post, returnable within two weeks. The petitioner will also serve notice on the respondent in these two matters through the Advocates appearing for that party before the court below concerned and file memo showing service of notice in that regard. 3. Pending consideration of these Transfer Petitions (Civil), it is ordered in the interest of justice that all further proceedings in O.P.Nos.880 and 881 of 2017 on the file of the Family Court, Mavelikkara, will remain stayed. This interlocutory order will be in force for a period of one month. List these matters on 15.2.2018 for disposal in the admission list. Tr.P.(C) No.34/18 & 36/18 : **:6::** **ALEXANDER THOMAS JUDGE** csl Hand over copy