IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C) No. 16239 of 2006(G)
1. JAISON K. JOHN, AGED 33 YEARS,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. TESSY THOMAS, AGED 31 YEARS,
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.VIJAI MATHEWS
For Respondent :SMT.K.V.BHADRA KUMARI
The Hon'ble MR. Justice KURIAN JOSEPH
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN
Dated :13/04/2007
O R D E R
KURIAN JOSEPH & K.T. SANKARAN, JJ.
------------------------------------
W.P.(C) NO. 16239 OF 2006 G
------------------------------------
Dated this the 13th day of April,2007
JUDGMENT
Kurian Joseph, J.
The challenge is on Ext.P7 order passed by the
Family Court, Kottayam. As per the said order, request
of the petitioner, who is the husband of the
respondent, to send the parties for further counselling
was rejected. The marriage between the parties took
place on 27.12.2001. There is a dispute as to whether
the marriage has been consummated or not. Be that as
it may, the main ground taken in the Original Petition
filed before the Family Court by the respondent wife is
that the marriage has not been consummated. When the
case was posted before us, we had opportunity to talk
to both parties and the respective counsel as well. As
suggested at the time of hearing, the petitioner was
also referred to an institute of sexual and marital
health – Dr.Promodu’s Institute of Sexual & Marital
Health. The petitioner has not co-operated fully with
the various tests suggested in the Institute. When the
W.P.(C). NO. 16239 OF 2006
:: 2 ::
case was taken up today, petitioner submitted before us
that he was got examined at another centre –
Vishranthi Centre, Kottayam and according to them, only
with the presence of the respondent, a further
treatment in the matter could be made. We are afraid,
it may not be proper for this Court to permit the
respondent, in the facts and circumstances of the case,
to have further test or treatment for the purpose of
this case. It is for the petitioner to undergo any
counselling or any treatment and get appropriate
certificate from the competent doctors to the effect
that he is physically and emotionally fit to lead a
married life, in which event, the Family Court will
consider the matter in the light of such materials
produced by him and take a decision as to whether any
further counselling is necessary with the participation
of the respondent. Till such time, it may not be just,
proper and reasonable to compel the respondent to
undergo any further counselling for the purpose of a
decision in this case. Subject to the above liberty to
the petitioner, this Writ Petition is dismissed.
W.P.(C). NO. 16239 OF 2006
:: 3 ::
Registry will keep a photocopy of the report of
Dr.Promodu’s Institute dated 11.4.2007 and letter of
Vishranthi Centre dated 12.4.2007 for the purpose of
reference and will forward both the report and the
letter in original in a sealed cover to the Family
Court, Kottayam along with a copy of this judgment
immediately.
(KURIAN JOSEPH)
Judge
(K.T.SANKARAN)
Judge
ahz/