IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 12118 of 2009(R)
1. ABRAHAM.P.
... Petitioner
Vs
1. DEEPTHI JOSE
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.LIJU.V.STEPHEN
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
The Hon'ble MR. Justice C.T.RAVIKUMAR
Dated :08/04/2009
O R D E R
R. BASANT & C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JJ.
---------------------------------------------------------
W.P.(C) NO. 12118 OF 2009
---------------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 8th day of April, 2009
JUDGMENT
Basant, J.
The petitioner is the second respondent in a proceedings initiated by
the first respondent herein against him and the second respondent.
Respondents 1 and 2 are spouses. Their marriage took place on 24.9.2007.
The second respondent is employed abroad and he is now at his place of
employment. Two Original Petitions have been filed by the first
respondent before the Family Court. They are, one for divorce and the
other for return of ornaments. In the latter petition for return of
ornaments/money, the petitioner herein is the second respondent. The
case was posted for appearance of respondents from 22.11.2008. The
second respondent/husband has not entered appearance before the Family
Court so far either personally or through counsel or through any power of
attorney holder. The petitioner did enter appearance, but did not later
appear and he was set ex parte. The matter stands posted for recording ex
parte evidence on 5.5.2009. At this juncture, the petitioner has come before
this Court with this Writ Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of
W.P.(C)NO. 12118/2009 2
India.
2. What is his prayer? The petitioner submits that his son has no
problems with the first respondent/wife and that if the Family Court were
to make an attempt for a settlement, it might bear fruit. He is unable to
explain why his son has not chosen to enter appearance so far. It is
submitted that the second respondent is employed abroad and hence unable
to appear in court. We can understand that. But, he should have certainly
entered appearance through a counsel or through a power of attorney
holder. His father, the petitioner herein has now entered appearance
before the Family Court.
3. It is now submitted that the matter stands posted to 5.5.2009.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the second
respondent/husband is expected to be in India on 25.5.2009 and if the
matter is adjourned to a date thereafter, the second respondent will be able
to appear and take part in the conciliation.
4. The bonafides of the second respondent remains suspect. If
actually he wants to participate in the conciliation, he should appear before
the Family Court. He appears, to us, to be playing hide and seek and not
W.P.(C)NO. 12118/2009 3
appearing before the Family Court. We are satisfied that no other specific
direction in favour of the second respondent herein is necessary. If the
second respondent is serious in his submission that he wants to participate
in the proceedings, he should appear before the Family Court on or before
5.5.2009 and make appropriate request. He can appear personally or
through a pleader or through a power of attorney holder after securing the
requisite leave. If such an application is filed, the Family Court must
certainly consider whether the second respondent deserves to be granted
time to appear personally on or after 25.5.2009. Appropriate orders must
be passed by the Family Court on such application, if any filed.
5. With the above observation, this Writ Petition is dismissed.
(R. BASANT)
JUDGE
(C.T. RAVIKUMAR)
JUDGE
sp/
W.P.(C)NO. 12118/2009 4
R. BASANT &
C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JJ.
W.P.(C) NO. 12118/2009
JUDGMENT
8th April, 2009
W.P.(C)NO. 12118/2009 5
