IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
RPFC.No. 121 of 2005()
1. REGHUVARAN, S.K.BUILDING,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. SAVITHRI, POOCHADIVILA PUTHEN VEEDU,
... Respondent
2. REENA, D/O.SAVITHRI OF DO. DO.
3. UNNY, S/O. SAVITHRI OF DO. DO.
4. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
For Petitioner :SRI.V.N.ACHUTHA KURUP (SR.)
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.N.KRISHNAN
Dated :17/03/2010
O R D E R
M.N. KRISHNAN, J.
...........................................
R.P.(F.C).No.121 OF 2005
.............................................
Dated this the 17th day of March, 2010.
O R D E R
This revision is preferred against the order of the
Family Court, Kottarakkara in CMP.No.9/2005. By the said
order, the court directed the revision petitioner to be
arrested and detained in jail for one month. It is challenging
that order, the revision petitioner has come up before this
Court.
2. The contention raised by the learned counsel for
the revision petitioner is that he has moved a suit for
declaration that the lady is not his wife and the children are
not his. It was turned down by the trial court and the
matter is pending consideration before this Court in appeal.
Secondly it is contended that without re coursing to the
remedies available under Section 421 of Cr.P.C, it may not be
correct to arrest and send him to jail. The family court has
not considered these points. If appeal is pending and
execution of the order is stayed by the appellate court,
nothing could be done at this stage for executing the same.
: 2 :
R.P.(F.C).No.121 OF 2005
If there is no stay order, certainly the petitioners in the MC
are entitled to relief. But even in such cases, a contention
is raised to the effect that unless methods known to law under
Section 421 of Cr.P.C is taken to recover it by proceeding
against the property, it may not be proper to arrest and
send him to jail. It is also a contention which is worth
consideration.
3. Therefore the order under challenge is set aside and
the matter is remitted back to the family court with a
direction to permit the revision petitioner to appear before
that court and raise his objections. The court can decide
the same after hearing both sides and then proceed in
accordance with law. Parties are directed to appear before
the family court on 19.4.2010. If the wife does not appear
on that day, let a notice be issued to her for appearance and
till a final decision is taken in the matter, let the revision
petitioner be not arrested and send to jail.
Disposed of accordingly.
M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE
cl
: 3 :
R.P.(F.C).No.121 OF 2005
: 4 :
R.P.(F.C).No.121 OF 2005