IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 17790 of 2010(R)
1. PRIYA BIJU MENON, D/O.EAPEN NINAN,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. BIJU MENON, S/O.P.GOPINATH,
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.P.SANTHOSH (PODUVAL)
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
The Hon'ble MRS. Justice M.C.HARI RANI
Dated :09/06/2010
O R D E R
R.BASANT & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ.
**********************
W.P(C) No.17790 of 2010
*********************
Dated this the 9th day of June, 2010
JUDGMENT
BASANT, J.
The petitioner has come to this Court with this Writ Petition
complaining about abuse of jurisdiction of the Family Court by
the respondent. The contestants are spouses. A child, now aged
3 = years, is born in the wedlock. Proceedings have been
initiated by the petitioner before the Family Court at
Coimbatore. The respondent had appeared before the Family
Court. Solely for the purpose of vexing and harassing the
petitioner, subsequently the respondent has filed a petition
before the Family Court, Trichur. The Family Court, Trichur has
issued an exparte interim direction to the petitioner/mother to
produce the minor child aged 3 = years. There is gross
suppression of facts. There is no territorial jurisdiction for the
Family Court, Trichur to entertain the dispute. Solely for the
purpose of vexing and harassing the petitioner, such proceedings
has been initiated before the Family Court, Trichur
misrepresenting facts and an exparte interim order adverse to
W.P(C) No.17790 of 2010 2
the petitioner has been secured. The petitioner, in these
circumstances, prays that the jurisdiction under Article 227 of
the Constitution may be invoked and appropriate directions may
be issued. The matter stands posted before the Family Court at
Coimbatore for conciliation on 25.06.2010, submits the learned
counsel.
2. We are not posted with the full facts. We do not think
it necessary to order notice to the respondent to resolve the
factual controversies. The Family Court, Trichur is already
seized of the matter. It is for the petitioner to appear before that
court and explain to the court the relevant circumstances.
Objection to jurisdiction can be raised by the petitioner before
the Family Court, Trichur and we have no reason to assume that
the Family Court, Trichur will not consider such objection
promptly in the background of the facts pointed out by the
learned counsel for the petitioner before us.
3. We are not satisfied that this Writ Petition deserves
admission. But we may hasten to observe that if the petitioner
appears before the Family Court with the child on the next date
of posting and raises relevant contentions, the Family Court,
Trichur must consider those contentions and take appropriate
W.P(C) No.17790 of 2010 3
decision before issuing any further directions regarding interim
custody of the child.
4. This Writ Petition is, in these circumstances,
dismissed.
5. Hand over a copy of this order to the learned counsel
for the petitioner for production before the Family Court, Trichur
on the next date of posting.
(R.BASANT, JUDGE)
(M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE)
rtr/