IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR THURSDAY, THE 4TH DECEMBER 2008 / 13TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 WP(C).No. 35816 of 2008(S) -------------------------- OP.1528/2006 of FAMILY COURT,ERNAKULAM .................... PETITIONER: --------------- DR.DIVYA JOHN, T.C.VIII/1545, "ANGELA", P.O.RAMAVARMAPURAM, THRISSUR 680 631. BY ADV. DR.VINCENT PANIKULANGARA RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. MADAN MATHEW, 2A, NEDUNGADAN RESIDENCY, ST.BENEDICT ROAD, COCHIN-682 018. 2. PROF.E.D.JOHN, T.C.VIII/1545, "ANGELA", P.O.RAMAVARMAPURAM, THRISSUR-680 631. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMAN & T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JJ. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C) NO. 35816 OF 2008 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = DATED THIS, THE 4TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2008. J U D G M E N T Raman, J. Petitioner seeks to quash Ext.P8 - an order passed by the Family Court, deciding maintainability as a preliminary point. Though maintainability is decide at this interim stage, this is certainly an issue arising in the case. Therefore, a decision rendered on one of the issues in the case is an appealable order. According to the petitioner, Ext.P1 evidences the marriage under the Special Marriages Act and the alleged insanity, being a ground raised for divorce or for annulling the marriage in the wake of Ext.P1, even prima facie cannot stand. According to him, even if the marriage in 2003 is stated to have suffered any infirmity or invalidity in the light of the subsequent registration of marriage by Ext.P1, the matrimonial relationship will still continue. For deciding the question of maintainability of the petition, the court at this stage need not go into the merits of the contentions between the parties as respect the ultimate relief that may or may not be granted. The parties were husband and wife and WPC 35816/2008 :2: one of them has approached the court seeking the relief of divorce on certain ground. Whether or not such ground exists itself is to be considered during the course of trial and therefore, the contention now raised by the petitioner will still be available to be raised and the petitioner has got an effective alternate remedy, after culmination of the proceeding, on the issue now raised. At the same time, we do not wish to conclude finally on the issue now raised and we leave open the right of the petitioner to agitate the question as raised in this writ petition and he will be at liberty to challenge the order impugned herein after culmination of the proceedings. The writ petition is disposed of as above. P.R. RAMAN, (JUDGE) T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, (JUDGE) knc/-