IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 27678 of 2010(R)
1. MADHUSOODHANAN.S,S/O.SIVANKUTTY UNNITHAN
... Petitioner
2. SIVANKUTTY UNNITHAN,AGED ABOUT 72 YEARS,
3. VIJAYAMMA,W/O.SIVANKUTTY UNNITHAN,
Vs
1. REKHA.B.NAIR,D/O.BHASKARAN NAIR,
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.M.V.THAMBAN
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT
The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS
Dated :07/09/2010
O R D E R
R.BASANT & M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ.
**********************
W.P(C) No.27678 of 2010
*********************
Dated this the 7th day of September, 2010
JUDGMENT
BASANT, J.
Petitioners are respondents 1 to 3 in an Original Petition
pending before the Family Court, Kottayam. They are the
husband and parents-in-law of the respondent herein. That O.P
is filed by the respondent herein claiming return of gold
ornaments, amounts etc. The matter stands posted to
15.09.2010. The petitioners are expected to appear before the
Family Court. According to the petitioners, petitioners 2 and 3
herein are old and sickly individuals, aged 72 and 64 years.
They are unable to undertake a journey to the Family Court.
They reside in Alappuzha district. They are afraid that the
Family Court may insist on the personal appearance of all the
petitioners before it. The 1st petitioner is willing to appear. The
2nd petitioner has already entered physical appearance before
the Family Court once. The 3rd petitioner, a woman, is unable to
appear. In these circumstances, it is prayed that future
appearance of the 2nd and 3rd petitioners may not be insisted.
W.P(C) No.27678 of 2010 2
Directions under Article 227 of the Constitution may be issued to
the Family Court not to insist on the personal presence of
petitioners 2 and 3 before the Family Court. This in short is the
prayer made in this petition filed under Article 227 of the
Constitution.
2. We find no reason for us to invoke our extraordinary
constitutional jurisdiction at this juncture. If petitioners 2 and 3
or anyone of them are/is not able to appear before the Family
Court, they must make an appropriate application before the
Family Court showing all reasons leading to the inability of such
petitioners to appear before the Family Court, supported by
adequate material. They must request the Family Court to
dispense with their personal appearance and seek permission to
appear through counsel. The learned counsel submits that
petitioners 2 and 3 are willing to execute an instrument of power
of attorney in favour of the 1st petitioner authorising him to
represent them before the Family Court. Such instrument of
power of attorney can also be filed before the Family Court. The
petitioners must seek appropriate directions from the Family
Court. If such an application is filed before the Family Court,
needless to say, the Family Court has to consider the same on
W.P(C) No.27678 of 2010 3
merits and pass appropriate orders. If the petitioners are
aggrieved by any such order, their option to approach this Court
shall remain unfettered. At the moment, we find absolutely no
reason to invoke our extraordinary constitutional jurisdiction
under Article 227.
3. With the above observations, this Writ Petition is
dismissed.
4. Hand over a copy of this judgment to the learned
counsel for the petitioners to produce the same before the
Family Court when such application, if any, is filed before the
Family Court.
(R.BASANT, JUDGE)
(M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS , JUDGE)
rtr/