Anusree vs Rajesh on 14 July, 2010

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Tr.P(C).No. 118 of 2010()


1. ANUSREE,D/O.SWAMYNATHAN,AGED 24 YEARS,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. RAJESH,S/O.DAMODARAN,AGED 32 YEARS,
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SMT.LATHA PRABHAKARAN

                For Respondent  :SRI.K.V.SOHAN

The Hon'ble MR. Justice THOMAS P.JOSEPH

 Dated :14/07/2010

 O R D E R
                  THOMAS P JOSEPH, J.

                 ----------------------------------------

                     Tr.P.(C).No.118 of 2010

                  ---------------------------------------

                Dated this 14th day of July, 2010

                               ORDER

This petition is for transfer of O.P.No.743 of 2008 from

Family Court, Kozhikode to Family Court, Malappuram. That is a

petition filed by respondent/husband seeking divorce on various

grounds including that petitioner/wife is having some mental

abrasion. Petitioner states that on an application preferred by

respondent/husband, Family Court, kozhikode had directed

petitioner to be examined by the Medical Board and as per

Annexure-D, letter the Medical Board wanted petitioner to be

admitted in the Psychiatry Department of Calicut Medical College

for a period of 10 days’ for observation and examination.

Petitioner challenged that order in W.P.C.No.20867 of 2009 and

this court as per Annexure-E, judgment set aside the order and

directed that after all evidence is adduced and evaluating the

materials Family Court shall be liberty to issue proper and

reasonable directions to get mental condition of petitioner

evaluated, if there be need for such expert opinion. Petitioner

states that two other proceedings initiated by her are also

Tr.P.C.No.118 of 2010
: 2 :

pending in Family Court, Kozhikode and since that court has has

already taken a view of the alleged mental condition of petitioner,

in fairness it is required to send the case to Family Court,

Malappuram. Learned counsel for petitioner has addressed

arguments regarding difficulties to which petitioner will be put if

the same court continued with recording evidence on the point.

Learned counsel for respondent would contend that there is no

reason to transfer the case to Family Court, Malappuram when

both the parties are residing at Kozhikode and it will not be

convenient to both sides if the case is transferred to Family

Court, Malappuram. It is also contended by learned counsel that

there is no basis for the apprehension expressed by petitioner.

2. Merely for the reason that Family court, Kozhikode

had passed Annexure-C order, I am not inclined to think that

petitioner will be put to any difficulties in the course of trial of

the case. I am sure, Judge of the Family Court concerned will

record the evidence of the parties, assess it and as directed by

this court in Annexure-E, judgment consider issue of collecting

medical evidence regarding alleged mental condition of

petitioner only if circumstances did warrant such a course. The

apprehension of petitioner is not shown to be real or substantial

Tr.P.C.No.118 of 2010
: 3 :

so that this court should interfere in the matter and direct

transfer of the case to Family Court, Malappuram.

Resultantly this petition fails and it is accordingly

dismissed.

(THOMAS P JOSEPH, JUDGE)

Sbna/-