In a significant order reinforcing the principle of convenience of women in matrimonial disputes, the Kerala High Court transferred a divorce proceeding from the Family Court, Nedumangad to the Family Court, Mavelikkara. The Court relied on established Supreme Court precedents holding that Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) must be interpreted to prioritize the convenience of the wife, particularly when she faces practical difficulties in attending proceedings at a distant location.
Background & Facts
The Dispute
The petitioner, Resmi V, aged 28 years, is the wife of the respondent, Rajeev Kumar R.G, aged 32 years. The respondent had filed O.P.(H.M.A.) No.1009 of 2022 before the Family Court, Nedumangad seeking dissolution of marriage. The petitioner, in turn, had filed O.P. No.186 of 2023 before the Family Court, Mavelikkara, indicating her inability to travel to Nedumangad due to the long distance.
Key Facts
The respondent filed O.P.(H.M.A.) No.1009 of 2022 before the Family Court, Nedumangad on an unspecified date
The petitioner filed O.P. No.186 of 2023 before the Family Court, Mavelikkara
The petitioner resides in Cheppadu, Alappuzha district, while the respondent resides in Karakkulam, Thiruvananthapuram district
The distance between the two locations posed practical difficulties for the petitioner to attend proceedings in Nedumangad
The respondent was served notice but did not appear before the Court
Procedural History
Unspecified date: Respondent files O.P.(H.M.A.) No.1009 of 2022 before Family Court, Nedumangad
Unspecified date: Petitioner files O.P. No.186 of 2023 before Family Court, Mavelikkara
13.07.2026: Petitioner files T.R.P.(C) No.777 of 2025 before Kerala High Court seeking transfer of O.P.(H.M.A.) No.1009 of 2022 from Nedumangad to Mavelikkara
13.07.2026: Kerala High Court hears and allows the transfer petition
Relief Sought
The petitioner sought transfer of O.P.(H.M.A.) No.1009 of 2022 from the Family Court, Nedumangad to the Family Court, Mavelikkara on the ground of inconvenience due to distance.
The Legal Issue
The central question was whether Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure empowers the High Court to transfer matrimonial proceedings from one Family Court to another, prioritizing the convenience of the wife over other considerations, particularly when she faces practical difficulties in attending proceedings at a distant location.
Arguments Presented
For the Petitioner
The petitioner contended that:
She resides in Alappuzha district, while the proceedings were pending in Nedumangad, Thiruvananthapuram district, making it difficult for her to attend
The convenience of the wife must be prioritized in matrimonial disputes, as established by Supreme Court precedents
She had already filed a case (O.P. No.186 of 2023) in the Family Court, Mavelikkara, making it the more appropriate forum
For the Respondent
Despite service of notice, the respondent did not appear before the Court to contest the transfer petition.
The Court's Analysis
The Court relied on a series of Supreme Court judgments that have consistently held that in matrimonial disputes, the convenience of the wife must be prioritized when considering transfer petitions under Section 24 CPC. The Court observed:
"The Hon'ble Supreme Court has time and again held that it is the convenience of women and children that has to be looked into while ordering transfer of the case from one court to another, particularly in matrimonial disputes."
The Court cited the following key precedents:
Sumitha Sing V. Kumar Sanjay and another [2002 KHC 1889]
Mona Aresh Goel V. Aresh Satya Goel [2000 KHC 1835]
Vaishali Shridhar Jagtap V. Shridhar Vishwanath Jagtap [2016 KHC 6489]
Santhini V. Vijaya Venkatesh [2017 (5) KHC 48]
Aiswarya N.C.V. v. A.S. Saravana Karthik Sha [2022 (5) KHC 185(SC)]
The Court emphasized that Section 24 CPC confers wide discretionary powers on the High Court to transfer cases from one court to another to meet the ends of justice. In matrimonial disputes, this discretion must be exercised keeping in mind the vulnerability of women and the practical difficulties they face in attending proceedings at distant locations.
The Verdict
The Kerala High Court allowed the transfer petition and passed the following directions:
O.P.(H.M.A.) No.1009 of 2022 is transferred from the Family Court, Nedumangad to the Family Court, Mavelikkara
The Registry shall forward a copy of this order to the Family Court, Nedumangad with instructions to forthwith transmit the records of O.P.(H.M.A.) No.1009 of 2022 to the Family Court, Mavelikkara
The Family Court, Mavelikkara shall, immediately on receipt of the records, issue notice to the parties for their appearance
What This Means For Similar Cases
Convenience of Wife is Paramount in Transfer Petitions
Section 24 CPC must be interpreted to prioritize the convenience of the wife in matrimonial disputes
Courts must consider practical difficulties faced by women in attending proceedings at distant locations
The absence of the husband's opposition further strengthens the wife's case for transfer
Supreme Court Precedents Are Binding
The Kerala High Court relied on five Supreme Court judgments to reinforce the principle that women's convenience must prevail in transfer petitions
Lower courts and practitioners must adhere to these precedents when arguing or deciding similar transfer petitions
Procedural Compliance is Mandatory
The transmission of records must be forthwith and without delay
The transferee court must immediately issue notice to the parties upon receipt of records
Practitioners must ensure strict compliance with these procedural directions to avoid unnecessary adjournments or remands
