IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID TUESDAY, THE 17TH JUNE 2008 / 27TH JYAISHTA 1930 Mat.Appeal.No. 719 of 2007 --------------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 26/11/2007 IN IA 1345/2007 IN OP.504/2007 of FAMILY COURT,THRISSUR .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER: ------------------------------- P.AMBIKA, D/O.LAKSHMIKUTTY AMMA, PARIYANGADU HOUSE, PARLIKAD P.O., THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.D.SREEKUMAR RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT: ---------------------------------- P.KUNJAPPU PANICKER, S/O.KUNJIKKAVU AMMA, PARAPPURATH HOUSE, CHITTANDA P.O., MANAPPALLY, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI. N.P. SAMUEL THIS MATRIMONIAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: KURIAN JOSEPH & HARUN-UL-RASHID, JJ. -------------------------------------------- Matrimonial Appeal No. 719 OF 2007 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 17th day of June, 2008. J U D G M E N T Kurian Joseph, J. This appeal is filed against the order dated 26.11.2007 in I.A.No.1345/2007 in O.P.No.504/2007 on the file of the Family Court, Thrissur. As per the said order, the Family Court vacated the interim order of conditional attachment made on the scheduled property. It is seen from the order that the court has further dealt with the merits of the case and has made observations which are not required or warranted for the purpose of disposal of the petition. 2. We heard the counsel appearing on both sides. Sri.N.P.Samuel, counsel for the respondent submits that a mere allegation itself will not be sufficient so as to pass a conditional order of attachment under Order XXXVIII Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The appellant-petitioner should disclose the M.A.No. 719/07 2 basis of the apprehension and the source of information regarding transfer. 3. On going through the petition for attachment, it is seen that the appellant-petitioner has referred to her relief and has stated that in order to secure the decree that is likely to be passed, attachment is necessary since she apprehends transfer of the scheduled property. Learned counsel for the respondent, however, submits that the respondent has presently no idea to dispose of the residential property since it is the only property available with him. We record the above submission. 4. In the above circumstances, we do not think that any interference with the orders is necessary at this stage since the respondent has undertaken that there is no proposal for alienation of the plaint schedule property. We make it clear that, in case the respondent proposes to alienate the property during the pendency of the suit, the respondent will move the court below and seek appropriate permission for the same. We direct the Family Court, Thrissur to dispose of O.P.No.504/2007 within a period of six months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment. We make it clear that the M.A.No. 719/07 3 original petition shall be disposed of untrammelled by any of the observations or findings in the impugned order. This appeal is disposed of as above. KURIAN JOSEPH JUDGE HARUN-UL-RASHID JUDGE smp M.A.No. 719/07 4 KURIAN JOSEPH & HARUN-UL-RASHID, JJ. M.A. No. 719 OF 2007 J U D G M E N T 17.06.2008