IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI WEDNESDAY, THE 21ST JULY 2010 / 30TH ASHADHA 1932 WP(Crl.).No. 247 of 2010(S) --------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- MADHU NAIR, AGED 49 YEARS, S/O.K.RAJENDRA PRASAD, 2, SIBLEYVILLE LANE, HONEOYE FALLS, NEW YORK 14472, (LOCAL ADDRESS: T C 8/944, SREEKOVIL, TIRUMALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 006). BY ADV. SRI.T.RAMPRASAD UNNI SMT.SARITHA DAVID CHUNKATH RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. Ms SREELATHA NAIR, KURUMPELIL VEEDU, PERUMPUZHA P.O., KOLLAM-691 504. 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 3. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KOLLAM-691 001. ADV. SRI.M.K.DAMODARAN, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR R1 SRI.P.K.VIJAYAMOHANAN FOR R1 SRI.ALAN PAPALI FOR R1 SMT.DHANYA P.ASHOKAN FOR R1 SMT.ANITHA MATHAI MUTHIRENTHY FOR R1 SMT.O.V.BINDU FOR R1 SRI.N.N.ARUN BECHU FOR R1 SRI.V.S.BOBAN FOR R1 GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.K.J.MOHAMMED ANZAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. ********************** W.P(Crl.) No.247 of 2010 ********************* Dated this the 21st day of July, 2010 JUDGMENT BASANT, J. When this Writ Petition came up for hearing, it is brought to our notice that the Family Court, Kollam, is already seized off the dispute between the parties/spouses about the custody of their minor child aged about 4 ½ years now and that parties have already joined issue on this aspect before the Family Court in O.P.No.257 of 2009. Of course there is a contention raised by the petitioner that the Family Court has no jurisdiction to deal with the matter. That question is also receiving the attention of the Family Court, submit both counsel. In these circumstances, both counsel agree that the Family Court can be directed to dispose of O.P.No.257 of 2009 in accordance with law. The learned counsel for the petitioner prays that there may be a direction to the Family Court to dispose of O.P.No.257 of 2009 as expeditiously as possible. There can be no objection to that request. W.P(Crl.) No.247 of 2010 2 2. We are satisfied, in these circumstances, that this Writ Petition need only be dismissed now as the Family Court is in seizin of the dispute regarding custody of the minor child of the contesting spouses. 3. We note that we were not apprised in the Writ Petition about the pendency of O.P.No.257 of 2009 and the proceedings in details. We are not happy about that nondisclosure. But all the same, we are satisfied that as agreed by parties, this Writ Petition can now be dismissed with direction to the Family Court to dispose of O.P.No.257 of 2009 as expeditiously as possible. We are informed that the Family Court has already heard the counsel on the question of jurisdiction and orders on the question of jurisdiction is awaited. We need only remind the Family Court of its obligation to dispose of O.P.No.257 of 2009 as expeditiously as possible. We do not fix any time limit. But we expect the Family Court to dispose of the matter at the earliest - at any rate orders on the question of jurisdiction must be pronounced within a period of one month from this date. 4. This Writ Petition is, in these circumstances, dismissed. W.P(Crl.) No.247 of 2010 3 5. Hand over a copy of this order to the learned counsel for the petitioner for immediate production before the Family Court. Needless to say, we have not expressed any opinion and we have not intended to express any opinion on the merits of the rival contentions. The Family Court will have to resolve all the disputes raised before it. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) (M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE) rtr/