IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI THURSDAY, THE 16TH JULY 2009 / 25TH ASHADHA 1931 Mat.Appeal.No. 549 of 2009() ---------------------------- OP.1759/2005 of FAMILY COURT, NEDUMANGAD .................... APPELLANT/RESPONDENT: ----------------------------- AJI KUMAR, S/O BHARGAVAN, ASARI, RADHA BHAVAN, VALAOOR, PIRAPPANCODE P.O., NEDUMANGAD TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.SAJU.S.A RESPONDENT/PETITIONER: ----------------------------- PREETHA, D/O SAROJINI, VENKATTAYIL VEEDU, KANCHIRA P.O., VEMBAYAM VILLAGE, NEDUMANGAD TALUK. THIS MATRIMONIAL APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. -------------------------------------------------- Mat.Appeal No.549 OF 2009 ----------------------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 16th DAY OF JULY, 2009 J U D G M E N T Basant, J. Appellant has come to this Court challenging an ex parte order passed against him directing him to return of ornaments, articles, cash, etc. to his wife. The impugned order is an ex parte order. According to the appellant, he was wrongly set ex parte. Did the appellant file an application to set aside the ex parte order? Admittedly, the appellant has not. Can the appellant challenge the order passed on merits? No contention is raised except that he was wrongly set ex parte. 2. We are not persuaded, in these circumstances to agree that this Mat.Appeal deserves to be entertained. In the total absence of any challenge on merits and the challenge raised being confined only to the correctness of the order setting the appellant ex parte, we are of the opinion that this Mat.Appeal only deserves to be dismissed without any fetter on the right of the appellant to move the court below to get the ex parte order set aside. Mat.Appeal No.549/09 -2- 3. According to the appellant, he feels that he will not get justice at the hands of the Presiding Officer. If that be so, his option, it appears to us, is only to move an appropriate application for transfer when and after such application to set aside the ex parte order is filed. 4. With the above observation, this Mat.Appeal is dismissed in limine. R.BASANT, JUDGE. M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE. dsn