Tr.P(C) Nos.452 and 511 of 2020
Case Details & Bench
- Court
- High Court of Kerala
- Hon'ble Judges
- C.S. Dias
- Judgment Date
- 2022-12-15
- Court Decision / Holding
- Common Order: (i) Tr.P(C) No.452/2020 is allowed by transferring OP 298/2020 from the Family Court, Thodupuzha, to the Family Court, Pala. (ii) Tr.P(C) No.511/2020 is dismissed. (iii) The Registry shall transmit the records to the Family Court, Pala and inform them to consolidate and proceed. (iv) The parties may move the Family Court, Pala for consolidation and joint trial of all cases between them. (v) The Family Court, Pala shall immediately post the records along with Annexure A upon receipt. (Common order delivered by C.S. Dias, J.)
- Final Disposition
- Common order disposing of both petitions: grant of transfer in Tr.P(C) 452/2020, dismissal of Tr.P(C) 511/2020, directive to transmit records to Family Court, Pala, and permission for consolidation and joint trial; Family Court, Pala to post the matters along with Annexure A.
Parties to the Case
Appellants / Petitioners
- Molykutty T. Jose
- Elikutty Joseph
Respondents
- K.K. Varghese
- The Kudayathoor Service Co-operative Bank Ltd
- The Farmers Service Co-Operative Bank Ltd
Legal Representation & Advocates
Counsels for Petitioners
- • Justine Jacob
- • Sri.K.S.Arun Kumar
- • Smt.Bindu Mohan
- • Smt.Amrutha P S
- • Smt.Amrutha K P
- • Shri.Vijay Sankar V.H.
- • RAJEE P MATHEWS
- • Sri.C.N.MOHANAN (CHAPPURAIL)
- • Domson J.VATTAKUZHY
Counsels for Respondents
- • Sri.DOMSON J.VATTAKUZHY
- • Sri.K.S.ARUNDAS
- • Smt.BINDU MOHAN
- • Shri.ARJUN KUMAR K.S.
- • Shri.VIJAY SANKAR V.H.
- • Sri.JUSTINE JACOB
Case Synopsis & Summary
The Kerala High Court, in a common order by Justice C.S. Dias, heard two transfer petitions filed in respect of matrimonial disputes between Molykutty T. Jose and K.K. Varghese. Tr.P(C) No.452/2020, filed by the wife and her mother, seeks transfer of OP(Div) 298/2020 filed by the husband before the Family Court, Thodupuzha, to the Family Court at Pala, so that both proceedings—one concerning the chitty amount and related relief and the other a divorce petition—could be consolidated and tried together. Tr.P(C) No.511/2020, filed by the husband, seeks transfer of OP(Div) 758/2019, filed by the wife at Pala, to Thodupuzha. The court notes the parties’ assertions of inconvenience and hardship in contesting proceedings across two courts. Relying on established Kerala/ Supreme Court authorities, the court reiterates that the primary consideration in transfer petitions for matrimonial disputes is the convenience of the woman and children, and that such decisions are guided by a long line of cases including Sumitha Sing v. Kumar Sanjay and others, Mona Aresh Goel v. Aresh Satya Goel, Vaishali Shridhar Jagtap v. Shridhar Jagtap, Santhini v. Vijaya Venkatesh, and N.C.V Aishwarya v. A.S Saravana Karthik Sha. After evaluating pleadings and circumstances, the court exercises its power under Sec.24 CPC and allows the transfer of Annexure B (OP 298/2020) to Pala for consolidation, while dismissing Tr.P(C) No.511/2020. The Registry is to transmit records accordingly, and the Family Court, Pala is to proceed with consolidation and post the cases along with Annexure A.”
Provisions of Law Cited
Legal Doctrines & Maxims
- Convenience of the woman and children in transfer of matrimonial disputes
Submissions & Arguments
Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners
The wife Molykutty Jose and her mother urge transfer of OP 298/2020 from Thodupuzha to the Family Court at Pala, supported by the contention that Annexure A (the divorce petition) has been pending at Pala since 2019 and consolidation would avoid multiplicity of proceedings and save judicial time. They emphasize the age and hardship of the elderly petitioner, and reliance on settled jurisprudence that the convenience of the woman and children should govern transfer decisions in matrimonial disputes, citing leading Kerala High Court/Supreme Court authorities.
Contentions of Respondents
The husband contends that the sought consolidation is not to be favored; in Tr.P(C) No.511/2020, his petition seeks transfer of OP 758/2019 from Pala to Thodupuzha on account of his disability (amputation of the right leg below the knee and 45% disability) and travel hardship. The respondents argue against relocating the proceedings away from Thodupuzha and seek appropriate venue changes that reflect convenience and access, while opposing unnecessary multiplicity.
Cited Precedents (5)
| Case Name | Citation | Treatment | Explanation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sumitha Sing v. Kumar Sanjay and another | 2002 KHC 1889 | Positive | Cited as authority for the principle that transfer of matrimonial disputes is guided by the convenience of the woman and children. |
| Mona Aresh Goel v. Aresh Satya Goel | 2000 KHC 1835 | Positive | Cited to reinforce the convenience principle in transfer decisions. |
| Vaishali Shridhar Jagtap v. Shridhar Vishwanath Jagtap | 2016 KHC 6489 | Positive | Cited in support of the same transfer principle. |
| Santhini v. Vijaya Venkatesh | 2017 (5) KHC 48 | Positive | Cited as authority on transfer considerations in matrimonial disputes. |
| N.C.V Aishwarya v. A.S Saravana Karthik Sha | 2022 (5) KHC 182 | Positive | Cited as contemporary authority aligning with transfer principles. |
Diagnostic Tool
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.452 and 511 of 2020 and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.
Extracted Judgment Text
Exact text extracted from official judgment records.