Tenetowl LogoTenetowl
High Court of KeralaSingle JudgeDisposed with partial relief: Tr.P.C.Nos.628/20...

Vijayakumar M. vs Sathidevi A.L. (Tr. P.C.) 628/2024, 645/2024, 761/2024 and 764/2024, High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam

Case / Petition Number:TR.P(C) Nos. 628/2024, 645/2024, 761/2024 and 764/2024

Case Details & Bench

Court
High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges
  • THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI
Judgment Date
2025-03-19
Court Decision / Holding
Tr.P.C.Nos.628 of 2024 and 645 of 2024 are dismissed. Tr.P.C.Nos.761 of 2024 and 764 of 2024 are allowed, transferring O.P.424 of 2023 (Malappuram) and O.P.434 of 2023 (Kozhikode) to the Family Court, Vadakara. The transferor courts shall immediately transfer records to Vadakara, and Vadakara Family Court shall dispose of the cases in accordance with law. The parties are directed to appear before the Family Court, Vadakara on 29.04.2025.
Final Disposition
Disposed with partial relief: Tr.P.C.Nos.628/2024 and 645/2024 dismissed; Tr.P.C.Nos.761/2024 and 764/2024 allowed, transferring O.P.424/2023 and O.P.434/2023 to Vadakara; Records to be moved; appearance fixed for 29.04.2025.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

  • Vijayakumar M.

Respondents

  • Sathidevi A.L.

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

  • • P.V. ANOOP
  • • PHIJO PRADEESH PHILIP
  • • ABIN BENNY
  • • ANJU R S.
  • • K C MOHAMED RASHID

Counsels for Respondents

  • • PUSHPARAJAN KODOTH
  • • K.JAYESH MOHANKUMAR
  • • VANDANA MENON
  • • VIMAL VIJAY
  • • VINAYAK MANOHARAN P.

Case Synopsis & Summary

These four connected transfer petitions arise between the same set of parties regarding the transfer of matrimonial and related civil proceedings between Family Courts in Kerala. The husband (petitioners in Tr.P(C) Nos. 628/2024 and 645/2024) sought transfers from Family Court, Vadakara and Kozhikode to Malappuram, arguing that two of the cases are split between courts and that the wife’s travel and the burden of frequent court appearances impose substantial hardship. The wife (petitioner in Tr.P(C) Nos. 761/2024 and 764/2024) sought transfers in the opposite sense, contending that she cannot travel long distances from Vadakara to Malappuram or Kozhikode due to distance (over 90 kms one-way) and age-related health issues, and prayed for centralization of proceedings in Vadakara. The Family Court petitions are connected to other ongoing O.Ps: 162/2023, 424/2023 and 434/2023. The court heard arguments and relied on Supreme Court precedents emphasizing that in matrimonial disputes the convenience of the wife takes precedence and transfer should be ordered to reduce hardship. Relying on Sumitha Singh, Mona Aresh Goel, Vaishali Shridhar Jagtap and Santhini, the court held that the wife’s convenience prevails in these circumstances. The result was a mixed disposition: the husband’s petitions (628/2024, 645/2024) were dismissed, while the wife’s petitions (761/2024, 764/2024) were allowed, with records to be transferred to Vadakara and appearances fixed for 29.04.2025.

Legal Doctrines & Maxims

  • Convenience of the wife in transfer petitions; priority to wife’s convenience in matrimonial disputes; hardship considerations in transfer of cases

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioners (husband in 628/2024 and 645/2024; wife in 761/2024 and 764/2024) argued that the transfer should be ordered based on practical convenience and to reduce hardship. The husband contended that both parties reside in Kozhikode and there is already a pending matter in Vadakara; transferring to Malappuram would impose further burden. The wife argued the opposite in 761/2024 and 764/2024, asserting that travel from Vadakara to Malappuram or Kozhikode is difficult given the distance (>90 km one-way) and age-related health issues; she sought consolidation in Vadakara.

Contentions of Respondents

The respondents opposed the transfers, contending that the parties reside in Kozhikode and that the transfer would create inconvenience and delay. They argued that only one case is pending in Kozhikode and others in Vadakara or Malappuram; they urged that transfer be avoided unless compelling reasons exist.

Cited Precedents (4)

Case NameCitationTreatmentExplanation
Sumitha Singh v. Kumar Sanjay and another[(2001)10 SCC 41]PositiveCited with approval to support the principle that convenience of the wife governs transfer in matrimonial disputes.
Mona Aresh Goel v. Aresh Satya Goel[(2000) 9 SCC 255]PositiveCited for precedent on arranging transfers favoring the spouse in need of convenience.
Vaishali Shridhar Jagtap v. Sridhar Vishwanath Jagtap[AIR 2016 SC 3584]PositiveQuoted to uphold the priority of wife’s convenience in transfers.
Santhini v. Vijaya Venkatesh[2017 (4) KLT 415 (SC)]PositiveUsed to justify transfer to reduce hardship in 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 Vijayakumar M. vs Sathidevi A.L. (Tr. P.C.) 628/2024, 645/2024, 761/2024 and 764/2024, High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

2025:KER:23823 1 Tr PC 628, 645, 761 and 764/2024 **==> picture [58 x 58] intentionally omitted <==** ## **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** ## **`PRESENT`** ## **`THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI`** ``` WEDNESDAY, THE 19[TH] DAY OF MARCH 2025 / 28TH PHALGUNA, 1946 ``` ``` TR.P(C) NO.628OF 2024 ``` ``` TO TRANSFER OPDIV NO.162 OF 2023 OF FAMILY COURT, VADAKARA ``` ## **`PETITIONER/S:`** ``` VIJAYAKUMAR M, AGED 55 YEARS S/O VELAYUDHAN NAIR , MULIYIL(HO), PANDHIRAKAV P.O, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN - 673019 ``` ``` BY ADVS.P.V.ANOOP PHIJO PRADEESH PHILIP ABIN BENNY ANJU R S. K C MOHAMED RASHID ``` ## **`RESPONDENT/S:`** ``` SATHIDEVI A.L,AGED 51 YEARS S/O APPUTTI NAIR, SHRUTHI HOUSE, MEPPAYOOR P.O, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN - 673524 ``` ``` BY ADVS. PUSHPARAJAN KODOTH K.JAYESH MOHANKUMAR(K/2535/1999) VANDANA MENON(K/153/2007) VIMAL VIJAY(K/000214/2018) VINAYAK MANOHARAN P.(K/001679/2024) ``` ``` THIS TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19.03.2025, ALONG WITH Tr.P(C).645/2024, 761/2024 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` 2025:KER:23823 2 Tr PC 628, 645, 761 and 764/2024 **==> picture [58 x 58] intentionally omitted <==** ## **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** ## **`PRESENT`** ## **`THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI`** ``` WEDNESDAY, THE 19[TH] DAY OF MARCH 2025 / 28TH PHALGUNA, 1946 ``` ``` TR.P(C) NO.645OF 2024 ``` ``` AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN OPDIV NO.434 OF 2023 OF FAMILY COURT,KOZHIKODE ``` ## **`PETITIONER/S:`** ``` VIJAYAKUMAR M, AGED 55 YEARS, S/O VELAYUDHAN NAIR , MULIYIL(HO), PANDHIRAKAV P.O, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN - 673019 ``` ``` BY ADVS.P.V.ANOOP PHIJO PRADEESH PHILIP ABIN BENNY ANJU R S. K C MOHAMED RASHID ``` ## **`RESPONDENT/S:`** ``` SATHIDEVI A.L,AGED 51 YEARS S/O APPUTTI NAIR, SHRUTHI HOUSE, MEPPAYOOR P.O, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN - 673524 ``` ``` BY ADVS. PUSHPARAJAN KODOTH K.JAYESH MOHANKUMAR(K/2535/1999) VANDANA MENON(K/153/2007) VIMAL VIJAY(K/000214/2018) VINAYAK MANOHARAN P.(K/001679/2024) ``` ``` THIS TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19.03.2025, ALONG WITH Tr.P(C).628/2024 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` 2025:KER:23823 3 Tr PC 628, 645, 761 and 764/2024 **==> picture [58 x 58] intentionally omitted <==** ## **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** ## **`PRESENT`** ## **`THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI`** ``` WEDNESDAY, THE 19[TH] DAY OF MARCH 2025 / 28TH PHALGUNA, 1946 ``` ``` TR.P(C) NO. 761 OF 2024 ``` ``` AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN OP NO.424 OF 2023 OF FAMILY COURT, MALAPPURAM ``` ## **`PETITIONER/S:`** ``` SATHIDEVI A.L, AGED 52 YEARS, D/O APPUTTY NAIR, 'SRUTHI' (H), MEPPAYUR PO, KOZHIKODE (WITHIN THE JURISDICTION OF PAYYOLI POLICE STATION.), PIN - 673524 ``` ``` BY ADVS. K.JAYESH MOHANKUMAR PUSHPARAJAN KODOTH VANDANA MENON VIMAL VIJAY VINAYAK MANOHARAN P. ``` ## **`RESPONDENT/S:`** ``` VIJAYAKUMAR M, S/O VELAYUDHAN NAIR, MULIYIL (H) PANTHEERAKAVU PO, KOZHIKODE (WITHIN THE JURISDICTION OF PANTHEERAKAVU POLICE STATION.), PIN - 673019 ``` ``` THIS TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19.03.2025, ALONG WITH Tr.P(C).628/2024 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` 2025:KER:23823 4 Tr PC 628, 645, 761 and 764/2024 **==> picture [58 x 58] intentionally omitted <==** ## **`IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM`** ## **`PRESENT`** ## **`THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BASANT BALAJI`** ``` WEDNESDAY, THE 19[TH] DAY OF MARCH 2025 / 28TH PHALGUNA, 1946 ``` ``` TR.P(C) NO. 764 OF 2024 ``` ``` AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN OP NO.434 OF 2023 OF FAMILY COURT,KOZHIKODE ``` ## **`PETITIONER/S:`** ``` SATHIDEVI A.L.,AGED 52 YEARS D/O APPUTTY NAIR, 'SRUTHI' (H), MEPPAYUR PO, KOZHIKODE (WITHIN THE JURISDICTION OF PAYYOLI POLICE STATION.), PIN - 673524 ``` ``` BY ADVS. K.JAYESH MOHANKUMAR PUSHPARAJAN KODOTH VANDANA MENON VIMAL VIJAY VINAYAK MANOHARAN P. ``` ## **`RESPONDENT/S:`** ``` VIJAYAKUMAR M.,AGED 56 YEARS ``` ``` S/O VELAYUDHAN NAIR, MULIYIL (H) PANTHEERAKAVU PO, KOZHIKODE (WITHIN THE JURISDICTION OF PANTHEERAKAVU POLICE STATION.), PIN - 673019 ``` ``` THIS TRANSFER PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19.03.2025, ALONG WITH Tr.P(C).628/2024 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ``` 2025:KER:23823 5 **==> picture [58 x 58] intentionally omitted <==** Tr PC 628, 645, 761 and 764/2024 ## **O R D E R** (Dated this the 19[th] day of March 2025) **[Tr.P(C) Nos.628/2024, 645/2024, 761/2024 and 764/2024]** The petitioner in Tr.P.C.Nos.628 and 645 of 2024 is the husband and in Tr.P.C.Nos.761 and 764 of 2024 is the wife. (In all these Petitions, since the parties are one and the same, heard together and a common order is passed.) 2. Tr.P.C. No.761 of 2024 is taken as a leading case for convenience and the facts are as follows: The marriage between the parties was solemnized on 11.2.1996 and two children are born out of their wedlock. The children are under the care of the wife. The husband is working abroad. When the marital relationship between the parties got strained, the wife filed O.P.No.162 of 2023 before the Family Court, Vadakara seeking divorce and O.P.No.424 of 2023 before the Family Court, Malappuram for partition of 2025:KER:23823 6 **==> picture [58 x 58] intentionally omitted <==** Tr PC 628, 645, 761 and 764/2024 joint property belonging to the parties. O.P.No.434 of 2023, which is a divorce petition filed by the husband is pending before the Family Court, Kozhikode. 3. Tr.P.C.Nos.764 and 761 of 2024 are filed by the wife to transfer O.P.No.434 of 2023 pending before the Family Court, Kozhikode to the Family Court, Vadakara and O.P.No.424 of 2023 pending before the Family Court, Malappuram to the Family Court, Vadakara respectively. The husband filed Tr.P.C.Nos.628 and 645 of 2024, to transfer O.P. (Div.) No.162 of 2023 from the Family court, Vadakara and O.P.No.434 of 2023 from the Family Court, Kozhikode to the Family Court, Malappuram. 4. Heard. 5. The petitioner contends that she is not in a position to travel from her residence at Vadakara to Malappuram for 2025:KER:23823 7 **==> picture [58 x 58] intentionally omitted <==** Tr PC 628, 645, 761 and 764/2024 each posting, since the distance is more than 90 kms. and time for travel is around 3 hrs on one side. Moreover, she is suffering from age related health issues and there is nobody to accompany her. Hence, she wants transfer of the cases as mentioned above. 6. The husband, on the other hand, vehemently opposed to the transfer contending that both the parties are residents of Kozhikode. She filed one petition before the Family Court, Vadakara and another in Malappuram at her convenience. Out of the three cases, which arose between the parties, one is pending before the Family Court, Vadakara and another before the Family Court, Malappuram. Only one case, filed by the wife, is pending before the Family Court, Kozhikode and hence, he seeks the transfer of above cases. 2025:KER:23823 8 **==> picture [58 x 58] intentionally omitted <==** Tr PC 628, 645, 761 and 764/2024 7. The Apex Court in **Sumitha Singh v. Kumar** **Sanjay and another** [(2001)10 SCC 41], **Mona Aresh Goel V.Aresh Satya Goel[(2000) 9 SCC 255]** , **Vaishali Shridhar Jagtap V.Sridahar Vishwanath Jagtap[AIR 2016 SC 3584** ] and **Santhini V.Vijaya Venkatesh [2017** **(4) KLT 415(SC)]** held that, in matrimonial disputes, the prior consideration is to the convenience of the wife and in such cases the transfer has been effected. Thus, in the light of the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the afore cited decisions and considering the comparative hardship of the wife, I am inclined to dispose of these Transfer Petitions as follows: (i) Tr.P.C.Nos.628 of 2024 and 645 of 2024 are dismissed. (ii) Tr.P.C.Nos.761 and 764 of 2024 are allowed, 2025:KER:23823 9 **==> picture [58 x 58] intentionally omitted <==** Tr PC 628, 645, 761 and 764/2024 transferring O.P.No.424 of 2023 from the Family Court, Malappuram and O.P.No.434 of 2023 from the Family Court, Kozhikode, to the Family Court, Vadakara. The transferor courts shall immediately transfer the records to the Family Court, Vadakara, and the Family Court, Vadakara shall, upon receipt of the records, dispose of the cases in accordance with law. The parties are directed to appear before the Family Court, Vadakara on 29.04.2025. ## **Sd/-** **BASANT BALAJI JUDGE** dl/ 2025:KER:23823 10 **==> picture [58 x 58] intentionally omitted <==** Tr PC 628, 645, 761 and 764/2024 ## **`APPENDIX OF TR.P(C) 645/2024`** ## **`PETITIONER ANNEXURES`** ``` Annexure A TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION IN OP NO. 434 OF 2023 FILED BY THE PETITIONER AGAINST RESPONDENT DATED 10.03.2023 BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, KOZHIKODE Annexure B TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION IN OP NO. 162 OF 2023 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT AGAINST THE PETITIONER DATED 17.02.2023 BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, VADAKARA Annexure C TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION IN OP NO. 424 OF 2023 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT AGAINST PETITIONER DATED 12.04.2023 BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, MALAPPURAM ``` 2025:KER:23823 11 **==> picture [58 x 58] intentionally omitted <==** Tr PC 628, 645, 761 and 764/2024 ## **`APPENDIX OF TR.P(C) 761/2024`** ## **`PETITIONER ANNEXURES`** ``` Annexure A ``` ``` A TRUE COPY OF PETITION IN OP 424/2023 BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, MALAPPURAM DATED 12.04.2023 FILED BY THE PETITIONER ``` 2025:KER:23823 12 **==> picture [58 x 58] intentionally omitted <==** Tr PC 628, 645, 761 and 764/2024 ## **`APPENDIX OF TR.P(C) 764/2024`** ## **`PETITIONER ANNEXURES`** ``` Annexure A ``` ``` A TRUE COPY OF PETITION IN OP 434/2023 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT ON THE FILE FAMILY COURT, KOZHIKODE DATED 10.03.2024 ``` 2025:KER:23823 13 **==> picture [58 x 58] intentionally omitted <==** Tr PC 628, 645, 761 and 764/2024 ## **`APPENDIX OF TR.P(C) 628/2024`** ## **`PETITIONER ANNEXURES`** ``` Annexure A TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION IN OP NO. 162 OF 2023 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT AGAINST THE PETITIONER DATED 17.02.2023 BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, VADAKARA ``` ## **`Annexure B`** ``` TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION IN OP NO. 424 OF 2023 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT AGAINST PETITIONER DATED 12.04.2023 BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, MALAPPURAM ```