IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 24TH OCTOBER 2008 / 2ND KARTHIKA 1930 WP(C).No. 2937 of 2008(S) ------------------------- IA 1246/2007 IN OP.195/2007 OF FAMILY COURT, KOTTARAKKARA PETITIONER(S): --------------- SURESH, SON OF NEELAKANDAN ACHARY, RESIDING AT VILAYILAZHIKATHU, MANI BHAVAN, ALTHARAMOODU CHERRY, KADAKKAL MURI, KADAKKAL VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.JOHNSON GOMEZ RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. NIZAR AHAMMED, SON OF ABBAS, RESIDING AT LAILA MANZIL, KADAKKAL MURI, KADAKKAL VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 2. HASEENA, AGED 35 YEARS, WIFE OF NIZAR AHAMMED, RESIDING AT SAFEEK MANZIL, PALLIMUKKU, KADAKKAL VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT FROM THAHIRA MANZIL, ANAPPARA, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. ADV. SRI.B.MOHANLAL FOR R2 SRI.C.R.SIVAKUMAR FOR R1 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) 2937/2008 EXT.P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT FOR SALE DATED 1.3.2007 EXECUTED BY THE PETITIOENR AND THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICIE DATED 16.4.2007 ISSUED TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P3 SERIES TRUE COPY OF THE POSTAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT CARD ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORIGINAL PETITION IN O.P. 195/2007 ON TE FILE OF THE ADDITIONAL FAMILY COURT, KOTTARAKKARA. EXT.P5 A TRUE COPY OF PLAINT IN O.S. NO. 74/2007 ON THE FILE OF SUB COURT, KOTTARAKKARA. EXT.P6 A TRUE COPY OF I.A. NO. 1246/2007 IN O.P. NO. 195/2007 BEFORE THE ADDITIONAL FAMILY COURT, KOTTARAKKARA. EXT.P7 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 7TH NOVEMBER, 2007 IN I.A. 1246/2007 IN O.P. 195/2007 OF THE FAMILY COURT, KOTTARAKKARA. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. // TRUE COPY // P.S. TO JUDGE. KNC/- P.R. RAMAN & T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JJ. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C) NO. 2937 OF 2008 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = DATED THIS, THE 24TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2008. J U D G M E N T Raman, J. Petitioner is aggrieved by an order passed by the court below refusing to implead him as a party in O.P. No. 195/2007 - a matrimonial dispute between the respondents herein. The contention of the petitioner was that there is an agreement for sale of an immovable property between himself and the first respondent and though he was willing to perform his part of the contract, the first respondent did not perform his part and therefore, he filed O.S. 74/2008. He even alleged a collusion between respondents 1 and 2, in the matrimonial dispute. The court below, by the impugned order, found that the dispute is only between the respondents herein and as such, the petitioner cannot be impleaded in the case. We cannot find fault with the court below in dismissing the impleading petition. 2. It has to be noticed that a property belonging to the first respondent is attached in a claim made by the second respondent. Whether the petitioner has got any right over that property or not need not be decided in this proceeding. However, if a party comes to the court and raises a W.P.(C) 2937/2008 :2: claim seeking to lift the attachment, he has to be heard and told after adjudication whether he has got a right and whether the attachment is to be be lifted. The court below has not considered this aspect. In such circumstances, if the petitioner makes an application raising any claim over the attached property, the same will be considered and decided after hearing all the parties. The writ petition is disposed of as above. P.R. RAMAN, (JUDGE) T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, (JUDGE) knc/-