Blog

Case Title : Rajam Babu V Babu K.K 

Bench : Hon’ble Mr. Justice Anil K. Narendran 

Date : 21/06/2023

Transfer Petition No. 76 of 2023 

Introduction:

In this case review, we explore a legal matter involving the transfer of a matrimonial dispute. The case revolves around a wife’s request to move her divorce case from one court to another for her convenience. Let’s take a closer look at the facts, analysis, and judgement of this case, which highlights the importance of considering the convenience of the parties involved.

Facts:

1. The appellant, who is the wife, filed a Transfer Petition (C) No.76 of 2023 seeking to transfer O.P.No.2752 of 2019 from the Family Court, Ernakulam to the Family Court, Thrissur.
2. The Transfer Petition was dismissed on 25.05.2023.
3. The appellant and the respondent are Hindus governed by the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.
4. O.P.No.2752 of 2019 is a petition for divorce filed by the respondent before the Family Court, Ernakulam.
5. The appellant had also filed a petition for restitution of conjugal rights, O.P.No.1119 of 2019, before the Family Court, Thrissur.
6. The appellant sought the transfer of O.P.No.2752 of 2019 based on her convenience and the requirement for a joint trial of the two cases.

Analysis:

1. The court refers to previous judgments, including Guda Vijayalakshmi v. Guda Ramchandra Sekhara Sastry, which held that divorce and restitution of conjugal rights petitions between the same parties should be heard and decided together to avoid conflicting decisions.
2. Section 21A of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 provides for the transfer of petitions in certain situations. Sub-section (2)(b) of Section 21A allows for the transfer of a petition presented later to the district court where the earlier petition was presented.
3. The court cites previous judgments, including Mona Aresh Goel v. Aresh Satya Goel, Sumita Singh v. Kumar Sanjay and another, Vaishali Shridhar Jagtap v. Sridhar Vishwanath Jagtap, and Santhini v. Vijaya Venkatesh, which emphasize the importance of considering the convenience of the wife in deciding a petition for transfer of a matrimonial dispute.
4. The court notes that the wife’s convenience should be given priority, and the husband should ordinarily take proceedings in the court where the wife resides to minimise inconvenience and avoid delay.

Judgement:

1. The court concludes that the appellant’s request for the transfer of O.P.No.2752 of 2019 from the Family Court, Ernakulam to the Family Court, Thrissur should be allowed.
2. Considering the appellant’s age (69 years), the respondent’s age (72 years), and the principles established in previous cases, the court finds that the transfer is necessary and fair.
3. The appeal is allowed, and the Family Court, Ernakulam is directed to transmit the records of O.P.No.2752 of 2019 to the Family Court, Thrissur.

click here to view judgement

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

WRITTEN BY- ANVITHA RAO