Arun Paryadath v. Lakshmi Arun
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.KEMAL PASHA WEDNESDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2015/8TH ASWINA, 1937 Tr.P(Crl.).No. 55 of 2015 () ----------------------------- MC.NO. 284/2014 OF FAMILY COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM ------------------ PETITIONER/RESPONDENT:
-------------------------------------------- ARUN PARYADATH, AGED 36 YEARS, S/O.P.SUDHAKARAN, DEVI, 29/117, JANATHA ROAD, VYTILLA, KOCHI-682 019, REP. BY THE POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER, SREEDEVI.C., AGED 64 YEARS, W/O.P.SUDHAKARAN, DEVI, 29/117, JANATHA ROAD, VYTILLA, KOCHI-682 019.
BY ADVS.SRI.S.RAJEEV SRI.K.K.DHEERENDRAKRISHNAN SRI.V.VINAY RESPONDENT/PETITIONER:
-------------------------------------------- LAKSHMI ARUN, AGED 33 YEARS, "SOUPARNIKA CHELLAM", TC 29/42(2), MADHAVA MANDIRAM LANE, MKK NAIR ROAD, PETTAH, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 024.
THIS TRANSFER PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30-09-2015, ALONG WITH TPC.NO. 243/2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
sts
Tr.P(Crl.).No. 55 of 2015 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES:
ANNEX 1 COPY OF THE OP NO.450/2015 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, ERNAKULAM.
ANNEX II COPY OF THE MC.NO.284/14 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES:
NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE sts
B.KEMAL PASHA, J.
==================== Tr.P.(Crl).No. 55 of 2015 & Tr.P.(C).No.243 of 2015 ===================== Dated this the 30th day of September, 2015
O R D E R
The husband has filed Transfer Petition (Criminal) No.55 of 2015 seeking the transfer of M.C.No.284 of 2014 pending before the Family Court, Thiruvananthapuram to the Family Court, Ernakulam. Through Transfer Petition (Civil) No.243 of 2015, the wife seeks for the transfer of O.P.No.450 of 2015 pending before the Family Court, Ernakulam to the Family Court, Thiruvananthapuram. M.C.No.284 of 2014 is filed by the wife and O.P.No.450 of 2015 is filed by the husband.
2. On hearing the learned counsel on both sides, it has come out that the wife is employed in UAE and is still remaining in UAE. The husband is employed in Doha and
Tr.P.(Crl).No. 55 of 2015 & Tr.P.(C).No.243 of 2015 he is still remaining there. These are luxurious litigations. It is not just and convenient to any of the parties to have a transfer as prayed for at present. When both the parties are remaining abroad, there is no meaning in effecting the transfer as prayed for at present. When there is no necessity at present, these Transfer Petitions are only to be dismissed. At the same time, it is open to the parties once again to approach this Court at the appropriate stage. With the said observations, these Transfer Petitions are dismissed.
Sd/- B.KEMAL PASHA JUDGE DSV/1/10/15 // True Copy // P.A. To Judge