IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 31567 of 2009(R)
1. ANILKUMAR,AGED 39 YEARS,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. P.C.KUTTAPPAN,AGED 85 YEARS,
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.G.HARIHARAN
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
The Hon'ble MRS. Justice M.C.HARI RANI
Dated :05/11/2009
O R D E R
R.BASANT & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ.
------------------------------------
W.P(C) No.31567 of 2009
-------------------------------------
Dated this the 5th day of November, 2009
JUDGMENT
BASANT, J.
The petitioner has come to this Court with twin requests.
He prays that O.P.No.835 of 2009 pending before the Family
Court may be disposed of expeditiously. He prays that the same
may be referred to the Lok Adalat. He further prays that
proceedings in an execution petition against him, ie. E.P.No.80 of
2006, may be kept in abeyance until the said dispute is resolved.
2. We have heard the learned counsel. We find
absolutely no merit in the prayers. A brief narration of facts
which led to the O.P may be relevant.
3. Admittedly the mother of the claimant/minor is no
more. There was a dispute regarding custody of the minor child.
The matter was settled at the Lok Adalat. An award was passed
by the Lok Adalat. As per the terms of the award, the child was
left in the custody of its maternal grandfather, ie. the respondent
herein. The petitioner agreed to deposit an amount of Rs.5,000/-
W.P(C) No.31567 of 2009 2
which would be available to the child on attainment of majority
along with interest. He further admitted the liability to pay an
amount of Rs.300/- per mensem as maintenance for the child
who has to continue in the custody of its maternal grandfather.
4. The amount of Rs.5,000/- was not paid. The monthly
maintenance @ Rs.300/- was also not paid. This ultimately
obliged the grandfather to file E.P.No.80 of 2006 claiming the
said amount of Rs.5,000/- and the balance amount of
Rs.39,600/- due under the award of Lok Adalat. It is during the
pendency of that E.P, that the petitioner has now filed
O.P.No.835 of 2009 for custody of his minor child.
5. We have no hesitation to agree that the Family Court,
Thiruvalla must dispose of O.P.No.835 of 2009 as expeditiously
as possible. We have also no dispute that if necessary the said
dispute can be referred to the Lok Adalat in accordance with law.
But we are unable to understand the prayer to keep the E.P
pending. Whether the O.P now filed is allowed or not, under the
terms of the award of the Lok Adalat dated 30.01.1999, the
petitioner herein is liable to pay the amount of Rs.5,000/- as also
W.P(C) No.31567 of 2009 3
monthly maintenance @ Rs.300/- per mensem until the custody
of the child is taken away from the child’s maternal grandfather,
the respondent herein.
6. It is not difficult to read between the lines and realise
that this Writ Petition is a transparent and shameless attempt to
stall the proceedings in the E.P. We are not persuaded to agree
that the jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India
can or need be invoked in the given circumstances.
7. In the result:
a) This Writ Petition is dismissed;
b) We make it clear that the petitioner’s option to seek
expeditious disposal of O.P.No.835 of 2009 pending before the
Family Court, Thiruvalla by reference to a Mediator, if necessary,
shall remain unfettered. But at any rate, the E.P will have to be
disposed of without taking note of the pendency of O.P.No.835 of
2009 immediately by the court below.
(R.BASANT, JUDGE)
(M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE)
rtr/-