In matrimonial disputes, while considering transfer petitions, the convenience of the wife has to be preferred over the convenience of the husband, the Kerala High Court observed.

The Court observed thus while allowing a Transfer Petition filed by a wife, against whom the Husband had filed divorce petition before Family Court, Pathanamthitta. She sought transfer of this case to the Family Court, Thiruvananthapuram. She contended that she has no source of income and she is depending upon her aged father for her livelihood. She said that she has nobody to accompany her to Pathanamthitta to attend the court proceedings and thus it will be convenient to her to attend the court proceedings at Thiruvananthapuram, where she resides.

As the husband did not enter appearance though a notice was served to him, the Court said that it has to be taken that he has no objection in transferring the case to the Family Court, Thiruvananthapuram.

"It is well settled that in matrimonial disputes, while considering transfer petitions, the convenience of the wife has to be preferred over the convenience of the husband. ", the Court observed referring to a few earlier judgments in this regard.

In Sumita Singh v. Kumar Sanjay [2000 KHC 1889], the Supreme Court had allowed a transfer petition filed by a wife by observing thus:"It is the husband's suit against the wife. It is the wife's convenience that, therefore, must be looked at, The circumstances indicated above are sufficient to make the transfer petition absolute.". Similar observation was made by the Supreme Court in Rajani Kishor Pardeshi v. Kishor Babulal Pradeshi [(2005) 12 SCC 237]. The Andhra Pradesh High Court had, taking note of the above judgment of the Supreme Court, observed in Sailaja V.V v. Koteswara Rao [2003 KHC 3105]) that in matters concerning the transfer of matrimonial cases, it is the convenience of the wife which has to be taken into consideration by the Courts.