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 16TH JUNE 2010 / 26TH JYAISTHA 1932 WP(C).No. 8514 of 2010(R) ------------------------- OP.1075/2007 of FAMILY COURT, KOTTAYAM .................... PETITIONERS: --------------- 1. VINOJ KURIAN, S/O.KURIAN, AGED 37 YEARS, THOTTUMANNIL HOUSE, VAIPUR KARA, KOTTAYEL VILLAGE MALLAPALLY TALUK, PTA DIST, NOW R/AT 8094 SW52ND COURT OCALA, FLORIDA 34476, REP. BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER, TOMY MATHEW, S/O.MATHEW AGED 59 YEARS, R/AT MADAPPALLIMATTAM VEETIL, ANICADU 2. KURIAN, AGED 70 YEARS, S/O.ISSAC, RESIDING AT THOTTUMANNIL HOUSE, VAIPUR KARA, KOTTAYEL VILLAGE, MALLAPALLY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 3. MOLLY KURIAN, AGED 64 YEARS, W/O.KURIAN, RESIDING AT THOTTUMANNIL HOUSE, VAIPUR KARA, KOTTAYEL VILLAGE, MALLAPALLY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.THOMAS ABRAHAM SRI.DIPU.R SMT.MERCIAMMA MATHEW SRI.K.S.HARIDAS SRI.V.RENJITH KUMAR RESPONDENT: --------------- LINCY ELIZABETH THOMAS, AGED 30 YEARS, RESIDING AT KARACKATTU HOUSE, KOLLADU KARA, PUTHUPALLY VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM TALUK, REPRESENTED BY THE POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER, JACOB C.KURUVILA. ADV. SRI.K.SANTHOSH KUMAR SRI.P.S.JAMES SRI.M.P.MADHAVANKUTTY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. ********************** W.P(C) No.8514 of 2010 ********************* Dated this the 16th day of June, 2010 JUDGMENT BASANT, J. The petitioners have come to this Court aggrieved by the steps taken by the Family Court, Pathanamthitta at Thiruvalla in proceeding with E.P.No.66 of 2009. 2. In O.P.No.1075 of 2007 before the Family Court, Kottayam, the petitioners have suffered an order. They have preferred an appeal. That appeal is numbered as Mat.Appeal No.292 of 2009. By order dated 06.04.2009 in I.A.No.1084 of 2009, an interim stay has been granted against execution subject to conditions. In the meantime the decree got transmitted and the same is now sought to be executed before the Family Court, Thiruvalla. On getting notice from the Family Court, Thiruvalla, the petitioners have rushed to this Court with this petition. According to them, it is improper for the court to proceed with the execution inasmuch as the execution is stayed vide Ext.P4 order. But did the petitioners bring this fact to the notice of the Family Court, Thiruvalla? Why have they unnecessarily rushed W.P(C) No.8514 of 2010 2 to this Court to act as a drain on the time of this Court? Why have the petitioners and their counsel not chosen to apprise the execution court of the fact of stay of execution? We do not get satisfactory answers to all these questions. It is for the petitioners to bring to the notice of the Family Court, Thiruvalla that there is a valid order of stay, that the conditions of the order have been complied with and that, in these circumstances, the decree is not liable to be executed now. The petitioners must do that. They have unnecessarily come to this Court. In these circumstances, we do not want to issue any directions. 3. This Writ petition is accordingly dismissed. 4. Hand over a copy of this judgment to the learned counsel for the petitioners for production before the execution court. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) (M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE) rtr/