Sethulakshmi Harinarayanan vs Sreenath Thulasidas
2022 Latest Caselaw 5005 Ker

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                      PRESENT
            THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
                                         &
               THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.G. AJITHKUMAR
     WEDNESDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF MAY 2022 / 14TH VAISAKHA, 1944
                            OP (FC) NO. 232 OF 2022
        AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN OP 726/2019 OF FAMILY
                                COURT,ERNAKULAM


PETITIONER/PETITIONER:

            SETHULAKSHMI HARINARAYANAN, AGED 31 YEARS
            D/O HARINARAYANAN, "KAMAL" HOUSE, KOTTARAPPATTU LANE,
            NEAR MUNICIPAL TOWN HALL, NORTH PARAVUR,
            ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN- 683 513


            BY ADV N.P.PRAJEESH



RESPONDENTS:

    1       SREENATH THULASIDAS, AGED 35 YEARS, S/O THULASIDAS,
            THACHETHU HOUSE, OLD KSEB ROAD, ELOOR SOUTH,
            UDYOGAMANDAL, ERNAKULAM, PIN:-683 501


    2       THULASIDAS, AGED 70 YEARS
            THACHETHU HOUSE, OLD KSEB ROAD, ELOOR SOUTH,
            UDYOGAMANDAL, ERNAKULAM, PIN:-683 501


    3       MANAGER, STATE BANK OF INDIA
            ELOOR BRANCH, UDYOGAMANDAL,
            ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN:-683 501



     THIS   OP    (FAMILY    COURT)    HAVING   COME   UP   FOR   ADMISSION   ON
04.05.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 OP (FC) NO. 232 OF 2022
                                 2


                            JUDGMENT

Devan Ramachandran, J.

Shorn of all unnecessary details, the petitioner only wants

O.P.No.726/2019 pending before the Family Court, Ernakulam

be taken up and disposed of without any unavoidable delay.

2. However, the learned Division Bench of this Court has

already delivered judgment in Shiju Joy v. Nisha [2021 (2)

KLT 607] that the petitioner must move the Family Court at

the first instance for this purpose; and we see from the file, - as

is also argued by Sri.Prajeesh, learned counsel for the

petitioner - that Ext.P2 application for the afore purpose has

been moved.

3. We are, therefore, of the firm view that the Family

Court must take up Ext.P2 and take a decision thereon, without

any further delay.

4. Resultantly, we allow this Original Petition to the

limited extent of directing the Family Court, Ernakulam, to take

up Ext.P2 application and issue appropriate orders thereon,

keeping in mind the declarations of this Court in Shiju Joy

(supra).

OP (FC) NO. 232 OF 2022

5. This shall be done after hearing both sides, as

expeditiously as is possible, but not later than two weeks from

the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

Needless to say, even though we have only directed

Ext.P2 to be taken up and orders issued on it, it goes without

saying that the said Court will endeavour to dispose of the

Original Petition itself in terms of the afore judgment.

Sd/- DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE

Sd/- P.G. AJITHKUMAR JUDGE stu OP (FC) NO. 232 OF 2022

APPENDIX OF OP (FC) 232/2022

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

Exhibit 1 PHOTOCOPY OF PETITION IN O.P NO.726/2019 FILED BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, ERNAKULAM

Exhibit 2 PHOTOCOPY OF I.A NO. 2080/2022 IN O.P NO.

726/2019 FILED BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, ERNAKULAM