Kerala High Court
Arya E.S vs Naveen Kumar on 22 January, 2025
Author: Devan Ramachandran
Bench: Devan Ramachandran
2025:KER:5177
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.B. SNEHALATHA
WEDNESDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF JANUARY 2025 / 2ND MAGHA, 1946
OP (FC) NO. 794 OF 2024
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 12.12.2024 IN OP NO.224 OF 2023 OF
FAMILY COURT, MUVATTUPUZHA
PETITIONER/PETITIONER:
ARYA E.S., AGED 37 YEARS
D/O SUDHAN, ELAVUMKUDY HOUSE,
VALAYANCHIRANGARA. P O, ERNAKULAM,
PIN - 683556
BY ADVS.
S.SURAJA
SAM ISAAC POTHIYIL
MUHAMMED SUHAIR C.A
RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT:
NAVEEN KUMAR, AGED 46 YEARS
S/O RADHAKRISHNAN K R, NAVANALAYAM,
VENGOLA. P.O , VENGOLA, ERNAKULAM,
PIN - 683556
BY ADVS.
T.M.RAMAN KARTHA
MANJULA NAIR(M-455)
KEERTHI.S.NAIR(K/827/2019)
REVATHY M.A.(K/001160/2022)
GREESHMA T.G.(K/002281/2022)
THIS OP (FAMILY COURT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
22.01.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:5177
OP(FC) 794/24
2
JUDGMENT
Devan Ramachandran, J.
The petitioner challenges Ext.P6 order of the learned Family
Court, Muvattupuzha, which has declined her request for a joint
trial of O.P.No.224/2023, O.P.No.1065/2023 and M.C.No.168/2023.
2. Smt.S.Suraja - learned counsel for the petitioner,
pointed that the O.P.No.224/2023 has been filed by the
respondent-husband, seeking divorce from her client; while,
O.P.No.1065/2023 and M.C.No.168/2023 have been filed by the
latter, seeking return of gold and for maintenance from the former
respectively. She contended that, therefore, all these matters
require to be tried jointly, or at least simultaneously, particularly
because the respondent is abroad and it would also be to his
interest that if it is so done. She argued that, however, Ext.P6
order has been issued by the learned Family Court in a
mechanical manner, finding that only O.P.No.224/2023 is now
2025:KER:5177
OP(FC) 794/24
ready for trial, while the other two cases are pending for
mediation.
3. Smt.Revathy M.A. - learned counsel for the respondent,
in response, submitted that the afore three cases can never be
jointly tried since the issues involved are totally different and
diverse. She then conceded that her client is abroad; but argued
that, since he has filed his proof affidavit in O.P.No.224/2023, his
cross-examination can be conducted, when he comes in February
this year. She asserted that, by then, neither O.P.No.1065/2023 or
M.C.No.168/2023 is likely to be ready for trial because, they have
now been listed only for mediation and that the mediators may
hold on to the file for certain periods thereafter. She thus prayed
that this Original Petition be dismissed.
4. We have examined the rival contentions of the parties,
on the touchstone of the various materials available on record.
5. Hearing Smt.S.Suraja, as recorded above, on
06.01.2025, we had called for a report from the learned Trial
2025:KER:5177
OP(FC) 794/24
Court as to the present status of O.P.No.1065/2023 and
M.C.No.168/2023. We obtained a report thereafter, which stated
that the afore two cases were listed on 20.01.2025, to await the
report of the Counsellor. We called for a further report, which is
now available, wherein, the learned Family Court has stated that
both the above cases are listed to 25.02.2025 for appearance of
the parties and for being referred to mediation. The report also
says that the respondent is stated to be abroad and that he will
be returning next month.
6. It is thus obvious that, whatever be the contentions
that the learned counsel for the petitioner may impel before us,
the respondent will have to be present before the learned Trial
Court for statutory mediation in O.P.No.1065/2023. Since the
respondent says that he is coming to India for this purpose in
February, it would be also to his benefit that all cases are
attempted to be disposed of together - either jointly or at least
simultaneously - because, we are without doubt that the essential
2025:KER:5177
OP(FC) 794/24
facts to be proved would be common, to a large extent, in all
cases.
7. Perhaps, sensing the mind of this Court as afore,
Smt.Revathy - learned counsel for the respondent, submitted that,
if this Court is inclined to set aside Ext.P6 and to direct the
learned Family Court to decide the matter jointly or
simultaneously - as the case may be, it may be directed to be
done within a time frame, because her client has been awaiting
orders for the last more than two years.
8. Even though we hear the learned counsel for the
respondent as afore, the fact remains that, normally, we do not
fix time frames for final disposal of matters by the learned Family
Courts, being cognizant of its huge workload. That apart, the
Original Petition for divorce was filed by the respondent only in
the year 2023, which is manifest from the number allotted to it,
namely O.P.No.224/2023. There are several Original Petitions
pending before the learned Family Court much prior to it and
2025:KER:5177
OP(FC) 794/24
therefore, the issue of prejudice, merely because a few more
months to be taken for its disposal, cannot appeal to us.
In such perspective, we allow this Original Petition and set
aside Ext.P6; with a consequential direction to the learned Family
Court, Muvattupuzha, to reconsider I.A.No.2/2024 in
O.P.No.224/2023, adverting to our observations and the reports
made before us, thus to take a final decision thereon, as per law,
after affording necessary opportunity to both sides.
We clarify that, even though we have set aside Ext.P6, it
does not mean that the learned Family Court must take a decision
in a particular manner and that it will be open, within its
discretion and the legal parameters, to arrive at any conclusion
that it may find fit in the interim application above mentioned.
We are persuaded to this course also because, during the
pendency of this case, the aforementioned Original Petition and
M.C. have progressed to some extent and it will certainly be open
to the learned Family Court to decide the I.A. afresh in such
2025:KER:5177
OP(FC) 794/24
altered circumstances also.
Sd/-
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
JUDGE
Sd/-
M.B. SNEHALATHA
JUDGE
RR
2025:KER:5177
OP(FC) 794/24
APPENDIX OF OP (FC) 794/2024
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 THE COPY OF THE DIVORCE PETITION WHICH
IS NUMBERED AS O.P (DIVORCE) NO 224/2023
FILED BY THE RESPONDENT IS PENDING
BEFORE THE HON'BLE FAMILY COURT,
MUVATTUPUZHA
Exhibit P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE O.P NO 1065/2023
FOR RETURN OF GOLD ORNAMENTS FILED
BEFORE THE HON'BLE FAMILY COURT
MUVATTUPUZHA
Exhibit P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM APPLICATION
FILED BEFORE THE HON'BLE FAMILY COURT,
MUVATTUPUZHA FOR INTERIM MAINTENANCE AND
WHICH IS NUMBERED AS IA NO 1/2024 IN M.C
Exhibit P4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY
THE PETITIONER IN O.P (DIVORCE) 224/2023
Exhibit P5 THE TRUE COPY OF THE JOINT TRIAL
PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE
HON'BLE FAMILY COURT MUVATTUPUZHA AND
Exhibit P6 THE TRUE COPY ORDER DATED 12.12.2024 OF
HON'BLE FAMILY COURT MUVATTUPUZHA IN IA
