IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Tr P(C) No. 6 of 2008()
1. NIZAMUDHEEN @ NIZAMBIN HAJ K.MUHAMMED,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. LISSY, D/O LABUDA,
... Respondent
2. LIJU, S/O JALALUDHEEN SEEYUDEEN,
3. SHARAFUDHEEN, S/O ABDUL KHADER,
For Petitioner :SRI.S.SANTHOSH KUMAR
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.N.KRISHNAN
Dated :25/01/2008
O R D E R
M.N.KRISHNAN, J.
--------------------------
Tr.P.C. NO. 6 OF 2008
---------------------
Dated this the 25th day of January, 2008
ORDER
This transfer petition is filed with a prayer to transfer OP
1232/06, pending before the Family Court, Nedumangadu to Family Court,
Thiruvananthapuram or to Family Court, Kollam. It is averred that the
Presiding Officer of the Family Court is adopting a hostile attitude towards
the petitioner and that he has already formed an opinion. It is also averred
that on 17.12.07, when the case was called in the chamber of the learned
Judge in the afternoon for taking the thumb impression, learned Judge
declared in open that the case filed is a false one and directed the
defendants to file a criminal complaint against the petitioner. Learned
Judge also threatened to dismiss the case, unless the petitioner voluntarily
withdrew the case. Hence a transfer is sought for by the petitioner.
2. Learned Family Court Judge had sent her remarks as
directed by this court and she has stated that all the allegations levelled
against her are incorrect. She has denied that the case was called in the
chamber for the purpose of taking out thumb impression. It is her version
that the thumb impression is taken in the open court and not in the
chamber. She had also categorically denied that she had expressed any
opinion about the case or given any direction to the other side to file a
Tr.P.C. NO.6 /08 2
criminal case. On 17.12.07, the respondents in the petition submitted that
the real dispute relating to the property is not between the spouses and so
the question of maintainability is to be considered. She had reiterated that
all the allegations in the transfer petition are not true but false.
3. I do not find any ground to disbelieve the report submitted by
the District judge and that too of an experienced District Judge. Therefore
the transfer under Section 24 of the CPC on the ground of bias cannot be
allowed because it affects the rudiment of the system and its discipline. It
is important that both parties as well as the court shall keep cool so that
there is no collision against each other. It is the system that has to be
respected and maintained with high dignity.
Therefore, I dismiss the writ petition making it clear that the
Family Court Judge shall not by her conduct make any impression that she
is biased because of the principle that not only justice should be done but it
should be seem to be done. I hope all concerned will keep the dignity and
decorum and help for a disposal in the right way.
M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE
vps
Tr.P.C. NO.6 /08 3