IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI FRIDAY, THE 22ND MAY 2009 / 1ST JYAISHTA 1931 WP(C).No. 12702 of 2009(R) -------------------------- OP.636/2008 of FAMILY COURT, KOTTARAKKARA .................... PETITIONER: --------------- MANOJ,AMBI PADINJATTATHIL, PUNALUR,KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.V.PREMCHAND RESPONDENT: --------------- ANJALI,HARSH NAGAR,NAZIRBAD POLICE STATION,KANPUR NAGAR,KANPUR,UTTARPRADESH. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/05/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT & M.C. HARI RANI,JJ ============================== W.P.(C)NO. 12702 OF 2009 ============================ DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF MAY 2009 JUDGMENT Basant,J. The parties are spouses. The respondent wife has filed an application before the Family Court, Kanpur for a decree for judicial separation. The same is pending as O.P.No.760/2007. The petitioner has entered appearance in that proceedings. As there was no early disposal of the case, the respondent wife had approached the High court of Allahabad and it is submitted that there is a direction by the High Court of Allahabad on 16-12- 2008 to dispose of the case within a period of six months. 2. At this juncture the petitioner filed an application for restitution of conjugal rights before the Family Court, Kottarakkara. The same is pending as O.P.No.636/2008. Though the respondent was served in that petition, she did not enter appearance. Noting that she was ex parte, the petitioner was WPC.12702/2009 -2- directed to file an affidavit. The petitioner did file an affidavit. 3. The mind of the Family Court appears to have been closely applied to the facts and therefore after the ex parte, affidavit was filed, the learned Judge reopened the matter and directed the petitioner to apprise the court of the stage of the proceedings before the Family court, Kanpur. The petitioner allegedly apprised the court of the state of affairs. Thereafter, no orders have been passed in O.P.No.7636/2008 by the Family Court, Kottarakkara. This is in short of the grievance of the petitioner. It is prayed that there may be a direction to dispose of O.P.No.636/2008 on merits immediately. 4. We are satisfied that the course adopted by the learned Judge of the Family Court, Kottarakara caters to the ends of justice. The petitioner was obviously attempting to steal a march clandestinely over the respondent by filing a petition for restitution of conjugal rights. When a petition for judicial separation filed earlier by the wife was pending before the Family Court, Kanpur and he had entered appearance in the said proceedings, with full knowledge that there is a direction of the High Court of Allahabad to dispose of the matter expeditiously, WPC.12702/2009 -3- he has chosen to file O.P.236/2008 before the Court at Kottarakkara. He appears to be confident that legal harassment can be perpetrated by adopting such a course. The learned Judge of the Family Court has committed no error in not hurriedly disposing O.P.No.636/2008. In the interests of justice and on the principles underlying Section 10 of the C.P.C.the learned Judge of the Family Court is perfectly justified in not hurriedly passing an ex parte order in O.P.No.636/2008 and waiting for the outcome of the proceedings before the Family Court, Kanpur. We are not satisfied that direction need be issued in this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 5. The writ petition is dismissed accordingly. Communicate this order to the Family Court, Kottarakkara forthwith. R. BASANT, JUDGE M.C. HARI RANI,JUDGE ks. WPC.12702/2009 -4- ks.