High Court Kerala High Court

Sheena Joseph vs P.C.Joy Alias Joy Pullali on 10 January, 2008

Kerala High Court
Sheena Joseph vs P.C.Joy Alias Joy Pullali on 10 January, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Tr P(C) No. 263 of 2007()


1. SHEENA JOSEPH, D/O.JOSEPH, AGED 37
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. P.C.JOY ALIAS JOY PULLALI,
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.MATHAI VARKEY MUTHIRENTHY

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.N.KRISHNAN

 Dated :10/01/2008

 O R D E R
                            M.N.KRISHNAN, J.
                            --------------------------
                         Tr.P.(C) NO. 263 OF 2007
                              ---------------------
                Dated this the 10th day of January, 2008

                                   ORDER

This petition is filed to transfer OP 1386/2007 pending

before the Family Court, Trichur to Family Court, Kottayam at

Ettumannoor. It is filed on the ground that the petitioner has to travel

a long distance and she is apprehensive of ill-treatment when she

proceeds. It can be seen that the petitioner, who is the wife, has

already filed an application for divorce as OP 743/2007 and it is

pending before the Family Court, Kottayam at Ettumannoor.

Thereafter, the husband of the petitioner has filed a petition for

restitution of conjugal rights before the Family Court, Trichur.

2. Learned counsel for the respondent submits that the

present transfer petitioner is now at London and that the respondent

herein intends to proceed to Gulf country. It is desirable that both

the cases are tried by one and the same court. Then the only

question is regarding the hardship. Since the wife has instituted the

petition before the Family Court first, and being a lady who may have

to travel, I feel that the comparative hardship is more on her. I make

Tr.P.C. No. 263/07 2

it clear that I am not entering into any allegations levelled against the

husband regarding harassment, which is pleaded in the petition. At

the same time, the husband also shall not be unnecessarily put into

difficulties. It can be protected by directing the Family Court, where

the case is to be transferred, not to insist for his personal

appearance on all hearing dates. Further when he applies with

reasonable grounds for exemption, allow it liberally.

Therefore, with theses observations, I direct that OP

1386/2007 pending before the Family Court, Trichur to transfer the

same to Family Court, Kottayam at Ettumannoor for trial along with

OP 743/2007. The Family Court, Kottayam may consider whether it

is possible to have an earlier disposal of the matter taking into

consideration the urgency submitted by the husband in the case.

The transfer petition is disposed of accordingly.

M.N.KRISHNAN, JUDGE

vps