IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI WEDNESDAY, THE 30TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 8TH ASWINA 1931 WP(C).No. 39856 of 2003(T) -------------------------- ( O.S.NO.226/2001 OF MUNSIFF COURT, THALASSERY I.A.NO.18/03 & 75/2003 OF FAMILY COURT, KANNUR) PETITIONER(S): --------------- K.SAMEER, S/O. ALI, 'MARWA', MANJAKKAL MAHE, U.T.OF PONDICHERRY. BY ADV. SRI.T.M.ABDUL LATHEEF SMT.P.RESHMA KABIR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- K.C.SAREENA W/O. K.SAMEER, RESIDING AT THAIF, P.O.ALIYOOR, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. ADV. SRI.P.M.PAREETH FOR R1 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 30/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 6-10-2001 PASSED BY THE MUNSIFF COURT, THALASSERY IN O.S.NO.226/2001 EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER DATED 3-10-2003 PASSED BY THE FAMILY COURT, KANNUR IN I.A.NO.18/2003 AND I.A.NO.75/2003 /True Copy/ P.Q.BARKATH ALI, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C)No. 39856 OF 2005 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 30th day of September, 2009 JUDGMENT Writ petitioner is the defendant in O.S.No.226/2001 of Munsiff Court, Thalassery. He challenges Ext.P2 order dated 3-10-2003 of Family court, Kannur refusing to set aside the ex parte decree. 2. The respondent filed O.S.No.226/2001 before the Munsiff Court, Thalassery for dissolution of her marriage with the writ petitioner under Muslim Women Dissolution of Marriages Act. The suit was decreed ex parte by judgment dated October 16,2001. Meanwhile, the Family Court, Kannur came into existence. He filed I.A.No.75/2003 to set aside the ex parte decree and I.A.No.18/2003 to condone the delay in filing that petition. The Family Court by Ext.P2 order dated 3-10-2003 dismissed both these petitions. Now the writ petitioner has challenged that order in this writ petition. 3. When the writ petition came up for hearing, counsel for the respondent submitted that the respondent has remarried and that if ex parte decree is set aside, it will lead to complications. WPC.No.39856/03 2 4. On going through the order Ext.P2, I find no error or illegality. The ex-parte decree was passed on October 16, 2001. The petitions to set aside ex-parte decree and for condonation of delay were filed on August 12, 2002. The revision petitioners before lower court contended that he was undergoing treatment in an Ayurveda hospital from June 24, 2002 to July 16, 2002. No evidence was adduced by him to prove the same. On the other hand, respondent has produced the copy of Docket sheet entry in M.C.17/2002 of J.F.C.M., Thalassery, which was a petition filed by respondent claiming maintenance against writ petitioner under Section 125 of Cr.P.C. It is seen from that document that writ petitioner appeared there on June 21, 2002 and filed counter statement on August 2, 2002. Under these circumstances, I am of the view that lower court is perfectly justified in holding that no sufficient cause is shown to condone the delay by the writ petitioner. All these apart, I feel that it is not proper to set aside the ex parte decree after a lapse of 8 years especially in view of the fact that respondent has married again. In the result, the writ petition is dismissed. P.Q.BARKATH ALI JUDGE sv. WPC.No.39856/03 2