IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
OP (FC).No. 330 of 2010(R)
1. ANISH ANTO, AGED 29,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. JISHA JOSEPH, AGED 28 YEARS,
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.P.HARIDAS
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS
Dated :18/10/2010
O R D E R
R.BASANT & M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS JJ.,
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
O.P.(F.C) No.330 of 2010
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated this the 18th day of October, 2010
JUDGMENT
Basant J.,
The petitioner husband is the respondent in a petition
for divorce. That petition was filed in 2010, the same now
stands posted to 11.11.2010 for evidence.
2. The petitioner has now come to this Court with this
petition to invoke the jurisdiction of this Court under Article
227 of the Constitution. What is his grievance? The learned
counsel for the petitioner submits that though parties were
referred for counseling, according to the petitioner sufficient
attempts have not been made to prompt a harmonious
resolution of the disputes between the parties. The petitioner
there fore prays that the parties may now be send to any
counseling centre.
3. There is no complaint raised that the legal procedure
prescribed under the Family Court Act to refer the parties for
counseling has not been done. We do not in these
circumstances find any merit in the grievance that the
O.P.(F.C) No.330 of 2010
2
extraordinary constitutional jurisdiction under Article 227,
deserves to be invoked.
4. The petitioner raises a further grievance that Ext.P1
petition filed by the petitioner for referring the spouses to
any counseling centre, has not been considered and no
further orders have not passed. At least the request is
entitled for a consideration of the learned Judge of the Family
Court, it is prayed.
5. We do not want to express any opinion on the merits
on the request in Ext.P1. The petitioner can certainly
approach the Family Court immediately with a request that
Ext.P1 may be disposed of, before the matter is taken up for
trial on 11.11.2010. When the petitioner makes such a
request, needless to say that the Family Court shall consider
the said request and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P1. We
do not intend to express any opinion on Ext.P1. We expect
the Family Court to consider Ext.P1 and appropriate orders
after being informed of the background of the disputes and
sequence of events that have been taken place prior to the
filing of Ext.P1, shall have to be passed.
O.P.(F.C) No.330 of 2010
3
5. With the above observations, this Writ Petition is
dismissed.
6. Hand over a copy of this judgment to the learned
counsel for the petitioner.
R. BASANT, JUDGE
M. L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JUDGE
dl/