JANCY JOSEPH Vs. ANOOP KUMAR P S

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THOUGH respondent is served on this petition, there is no response. I have heard learned counsel for petitioner.

(2.) THIS petition is filed by the wife seeking transfer of O.P.No.1319 of 2010 from Family Court, Ernakulam to Family Court, Kannur. That is a petition filed by the respondent/husband for restitution of conjugal rights. Petitioner states that she is a resident of Kottiyoor in Kannur District staying with her parents, she has no income and that she is unable to travel all the distance from Kannur to Ernakulam. Respondent/husband is a resident of Aluva. The Supreme Court in Sumitha Singh Vs. Sanjay Kumar & Another (AIR 2002 SC 396) and Arti Rani Lrs. Pinki Devi and Another Vs. Darmendra Kumar Gupta (2008 (9) SCC 353) has stated that while considering request for transfer in matrimonial proceedings convenience of the wife has to be looked into. It is seen that petitioner is now staying in her paternal house at Kottiyoor, in Kannur District. She has to travel more than 200kms from that place to reach Ernakulam even by train. Necessarily she has to be accompanied by somebody which involves expense also apart from the long distance she has to travel. It may not be possible for her to reach Family Court, Ernakulam on time considering the long distance from her place of residence. In these circumstances, I am inclined to think that comparative hardship is more on the petitioner if transfer requested for is not allowed than the inconvenience respondent may have to suffer if transfer is allowed. Hence I am inclined to allow the petition. Resultantly this petition is allowed in the following lines: