IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN MONDAY, THE 1ST AUGUST 2011 / 10TH SRAVANA 1933 OP (FC).No. 2479 of 2011(R) --------------------------------------- [EA.NO.124/2011 IN O.P. NO.400/2006 OF FAMILY COURT, ALAPPUZHA] .................... PETITIONERS: --------------------- 1. T.K.JAYASAGAR, S/O.LATE N.KUMARAN, THAIVEETTIL, CHERUKARA KARA, KAVALAM, KUTTANAD, ALAPPUZHA. 2. JAGADAMMA, W/O.LATE N.KUMARAN, THAIVEETTIL, CHERUKARA KARA, KAVALAM, KUTTANAD, ALAPPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.M.P.MADHAVANKUTTY. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. SINDHUKUTTY AMMA, D/O.RAGHAVAN, KARIPPURATHU HOUSE, VALYAD KARA, PULIKUTTISSERI P.O., AYMANAM, KOTTAYAM, PIN – 686 001. 2. JAYADEVI, VAIRATHUPARAMBIL, MUHAMMA, ALAPPUZHA, PIN – 688 001. 3. JAYALEKHA, KOPPATTUTHARA, PUTHIYAVILA, ALAPPUZHA, PIN – 688 001. 4. JAYALETHA, THAIVEEDU, CHERUKARA P.O., KAVALAM, ALAPPUZHA, PIN – 688 001. BY THIS OP (FAMILY COURT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/08/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: O.P.(F.C).NO.2479/2011-R: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE EXECUTION PETITION FILED BY THE R.1. BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, ALAPPUZHA. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY THE PETITIONERS. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE E.A. NO. 100/2011 FILED BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, ALAPPUZHA. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 29/06/2011 IN E.A. NO. 100/2011. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE E.A. NO. 124/2011 BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, ALAPPUZHA. EXT.P.6: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 29/06/2011 IN E.A. NO. 124/2011. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE. Prv. THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN & K. SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------------ O.P(FC)NO: 2479 OF 2011 R ----------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 1st August, 2011. JUDGMENT Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J. Ext.P4 is an order dismissing an application under Order XXI Rule 90 CPC. Ext.P6, though passed on the same day, is only an order during the proceedings that led to Ext.P4. An order on an application under Order XXI Rule 90 CPC is not an interlocutory order. Therefore, an appeal lies under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984. Even in terms of the Code of Civil Procedure, it is an appealable order. May be, the petitioner will be able to challenge Ext.P6 as part of that appeal. On the face of availability of a statutory appeal, law does not permit recourse to Art.227 of the Constitution. This original petition is hence dismissed without prejudice to the right of the petitioners to appeal against Ext.P6 order, in accordance with law. THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN Judge K. SURENDRA MOHAN Judge jj 2 3