IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI MONDAY, THE 10TH OCTOBER 2011 / 18TH ASWINA 1933 OP (FC).No. 3217 of 2011(R) --------------------------- PETITIONER/RESPONDENT ----------------------------------------- ZAKKIR HUSSAIN, EDIYANTAYYATHU PADINJATTATHIL, PADA SOUTH, KARUNAGAPPALLY. BY ADV. SMT.MINI GANGADHARAN RESPONDENT/PETITIONER ---------------------------------------- SOFIA, KASALAKKAKKOM VEEDU, PERUMATHURA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. THIS OP (FAMILY COURT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: OP (FC).No. 3217 of 2011(R) --------------------------------------- APPENDIX ----------------- PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- EXHIBIT P1: THE COPY OF OBJECTION FILED BY THE PETITIONER/ RESPONDENT IN O.P.942/2008 OF THE FAMILY COURT, KOTTARAKKARA. EXHIBIT P2: COPY OF THE I.A.415/2010, PETITION TO ISSUE SOMMONS TO WITNESSES. EXHIBIT P3: COPY OF FIRST WITNESS SCHEDULE. EXHIBIT P4: COPY OF I.A.1652/2011, THE PETITION TO RESTORE I.A.415/2010. EXHIBIT P5: COPY OF I.A.1653/2011, DELAY PETITION. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : NIL --------------------------------------- / TRUE COPY / P.A. TO JUDGE VK R.BASANT & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. * * * * * * * * * * * * * O.P.(F.C.) No.3217 of 2011 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 10th day of October 2011 J U D G M E N T R.BASANT,J The petitioner is the husband. His wife had staked a claim for amount, gold, compensation etc. before the Family Court. The claim was resisted. The claimant had adduced her evidence. The matter stood posted for the evidence of the petitioner/husband. On 24/5/2011, when the matter came up for evidence, he filed a petition to restore an earlier petition which was dismissed on 18/04/2011 for non-prosecution. He contended that he had mistakenly noted the date of posting of that petition as 18/06/2011. The petitioner filed a petition to restore the said petition dismissed for default on 18/04/2011. That petition was dismissed by the Family Court by the impugned order. 2. The petitioner prays that the extraordinary constitutional jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India may be invoked to interfere with the impugned order. O.P.(F.C.)No.3217 of 2010 2 3. We have considered all the relevant inputs. We are not persuaded to invoke our jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to interfere with the impugned order. Without prejudice to the rights of the petitioner to challenge the said order, if it be necessary, at a later stage, we dismiss this petition with the observation that the petitioner must attempt to adduce all evidence before the Family Court when the Family Court gives him opportunity to adduce such evidence. We are not persuaded to interfere with the impugned order. 4. This O.P.(F.C) is, in these circumstances, dismissed. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) (M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE) jsr // True Copy// PA to Judge O.P.(F.C.)No.3217 of 2010 3 O.P.(F.C.)No.3217 of 2010 4 K.M.JOSEPH & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. .No. of 200 ORDER/JUDGMENT 30/082010