AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
6 paragraphs · 345 wordsDevan Ramachandran, J.
The petitioner has approached this Court apprehending that Ext.P2 application filed by him before the learned Family Court, Irinjalakkuda, will not be considered by it; and that it will proceed to issue final orders in O.P.No.1527/2023, filed by the respondent herein.
Smt.M.Shajna – learned counsel for the petitioner, pointed out that, as evident from Ext.P5, the afore Original Petition was listed before the learned Family Court on 01.08.2024, whereby, after receiving the file from the Chief Ministerial Officer (CMO) – appending therewith the Counselor’s report, the respondent was examined as PW1 and certain documents marked. She submitted that the matter was thereafter listed on 05.08.2024; on which day, her client filed I.A.No.1/2024 praying that his counter affidavit be accepted; and therefore, that he justifiably believes that the learned Family Court will not dispose of the said application, but will issue final orders on 14.08.2024, as mentioned in Ext.P5 Proceedings Sheet. She thus reiteratingly prayed that the reliefs sought for in this Original Petition be granted.
We are afraid that we cannot find the afore apprehension of the petitioner to be tenable because, as is unmistakable from Ext.P5, while inditing the proceedings on 05.08.2024, the learned Family Court has recorded that the respondent (the petitioner herein) has filed counter affidavit, along with I.A.No.1/2024; and obviously, therefore, the date mentioned thereafter can only be construed to be the one on which the said application is listed for orders. If it were otherwise, the learned Family Court could have issued final orders in the Original Petition on 05.08.2024 itself, which it did not do.
We are, therefore, of the firm view that we do not require to intervene at this stage, particularly when the petitioner only seeks that the learned Family Court be directed to dispose of Ext.P2.
In the afore circumstances, we close this Original Petition; however, leaving every liberty open to the petitioner, as is available to him in law, including before the learned Family Court, as also this Court; for which purpose, all rival contentions are left undecided.