The above Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is filed by the petitioner/husband in a matrimonial dispute to withdraw MOP No.273 of 2013 filed by the petitioner/wife under Section 13(1)(ia) and 13(1)(ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 seeking divorce before the Family Court at Pondicherry and to transfer the same to the file of the Sub Court, Tiruvarur.
2. The brief facts of the case would run thus:
The respondent/wife alleging cruelty in the hands of the petitioner/husband has filed MOP No.273 of 2013 before the Family Court, Puducherry seeking dissolution of marriage. She has also filed maintenance petition before the said Court for maintenance. It is stated that the petitioner/husband had deserted herself and her minor child without any just and reasonable cause. She has also filed M.C.No.18 of 2013 seeking maintenance before the said Court.
3. Pending the said proceedings, the above Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition has been filed the petitioner/husband seeking transfer of the MOP No.273 of 2013 from the Family Court, Puducherry to the file of the Sub Court, Tiruvarur, where the petitioner is residing.
4. Heard both sides.
5. The following few facts are absolutely necessary for deciding this transfer petition.
(i) The petitioner/husband is seeking transfer of the MOP pending on the file of the Family Court, Puducherry to the file of the Sub Court, Tiruvarur on the ground that he is being threatened by the respondent's family members and that he was attacked by some assailants while he attend the hearing at Family Court, Puducherry. It is his further case that when he attended the hearing on 09.04.2016 for counselling before the Family Court, Puducherry the Advocate appearing for the respondent/wife humiliated him during the course of hearing; abused him with filthy language and at one stage, he was also attacked. Hence, apprehending danger at the hands of the respondent/wife family members, he seeks transfer.
(ii) On 22.09.2016, this Court had directed the parties to appear before the Mediation Centre at the request of the petitioner/husband.
(iii) Since the petitioner/husband had alleged that he was attacked, when he appeared for the proceedings before the Family Court, Puducherry on 09.04.2016 and the said fact was disputed by the respondent/wife by stating that it was the petitioner, who attacked the respondent, this Court vide order dated 27.09.2016 directed the Registry to call for a report from the learned Judge, Family Court, Puducherry with regard to the allegation made in the affidavit filed in support of the transfer petition and directed the Registry to place the report before this Court on 03.11.2016. This Court had also further directed that the report of the learned Judge should also indicate as to whether the petitioner/husband had appeared before the Trial Court subsequent to the incident in question.
(iv) In the meantime, the mediation conducted between the parties had failed, as on the date of the mediation that took place on 10.11.2016, the petitioner/husband and his counsel were absent and the respondent/wife had stated that she is not willing for mediation.
(v) As per the earlier direction of this Court dated 27.09.2016, the learned Judge, Puducherry has filed his report dated 25.10.2016, wherein the learned Family Court Judge, Puducherry had stated that at about 1.00 p.m., on 09.04.2016, when the proceedings in other cases were being conducted in the Open Court of the Family Court, by the Chair Persons of the Lok Adalat, there were some hues and cries raised by some persons on the verandah behind the Court hall and after some time, the same got subsidised and it was given to understand that there were some altercations between the parties and the advocates. Later, the learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent/wife had given a complaint stating that the petitioner/husband has criminally intimidated on his life and requested to take appropriate action. However, the allegations levelled by the petitioner/husband as against him by the counsel appearing for the respondent/wife had not taken place and that no complaint was given by the petitioner/husband regarding the said incident.
(vi) It is further stated in the report that from the date of next hearing, ie., on 10.05.2016, 10.06.2016, 21.06.2016, 21.07.2016, 12.08.2016, 29.09.2016 and 25.10.2016, though the respondent/wife had appeared, the petitioner/husband did not turn up for enquiry.
6. In this factual background, if the case on hand is analyzed, I could see no reason to transfer MOP No.273 of 2013 pending on the file of the Family Court, Puducherry to the file of the Sub Court, Tiruvarur as prayed for by the petitioner/husband. Further, the maintenance petition filed by the respondent/wife is also pending on the same Court. The report filed by the learned Judge, Puducherry also clearly states that no such incident as alleged by the petitioner/husband had happened before the said Court. The petitioner/husband has also not produced any evidence to prove that the alleged occurrence had taken place inside the Court premises.
7. Merely on the ground of apprehension of a party, a case cannot be transferred, that too, in a matrimonial dispute. Further, as per the report of the learned Family Court Judge, Puducherry, the petitioner/husband has not even attended the hearing for the past seven hearings.
8. In the above stated circumstances, this Transfer Civil Miscellaneous Petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is also closed.
13.02.2017 vj2 Index: Yes/No Internet:Yes To The Family Judge, Puducherry.
PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA.J vj2 Tr.C.M.P.No.278 of 2016 13.02.2017 http://www.judis.nic.in