The Supreme Court of India said about Keralites that “Even if they know English, they don’t want to speak it,” the observation came while hearing a plea to transfer divorce case from Kerala to Punjab in the court today.
The Supreme Court rejected arguments that language would not pose any obstacle in court proceedings in Kerala.
The Bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta ordered the transfer of a custody and divorce dispute from Kerala to Ludhiana, Punjab, citing practical difficulties faced by the wife.
The Bench was hearing a transfer plea filed by a woman who wanted the matrimonial proceedings initiated by her husband in Kerala moved to Punjab.
During the hearing, the husband’s counsel argued that there would be no problem in holding proceedings in Kerala, claiming that everybody knows English in Kerala and that the State is language-friendly.
The Court, however, did not accept this. Justice Sandeep Mehta observed that assuming language accessibility is not appropriate in a courtroom setting.
He stated,
“It is very difficult there. Don’t tell us. Even if people know English, they don’t want to speak it,”
When counsel replied that Kerala is a language-friendly State and that “Everybody knows English there,”
Justice Mehta said,
“Everybody who practices in the Supreme Court also doesn’t know English…”
The wife, who is currently residing in the United Kingdom, argued that she could not effectively contest the case in Kerala because of logistical and language-related constraints. She also pointed out that her mother, who is assisting her in India, faced similar difficulties.
The matrimonial dispute relates to a marriage in 2017. The couple lived together until 2023, after which they moved to the United Kingdom. The relationship deteriorated, and subsequently, the husband returned to India with their minor child. He then initiated proceedings in Kerala, including cases involving custody and divorce.
The wife sought transfer, contending that continuing the proceedings in Kerala would significantly prejudice her ability to participate.
The husband opposed the request, arguing that the child had been living with him in Kerala for the last three years and that the proceedings should therefore remain in that location. He also maintained that the wife’s being abroad could not justify changing the forum.
Nevertheless, the Bench noted that the wife had not been able to effectively participate in the Kerala proceedings and treated this as a key consideration particularly because the matter involved custody.
The Court also took into account practical issues connected to the minor child, including the hardship that would arise if hearings required repeated long-distance travel.
Ultimately, the Supreme Court allowed the transfer petition and directed that the pending proceedings be moved from Kerala to a competent court in Ludhiana, Punjab.