IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI MONDAY, THE 17TH MAY 2010 / 27TH VAISAKHA 1932 WP(C).No. 14638 of 2010(R) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): RESPONDENT ------------------------- KAVITHA, W/O.SHANMUGHAN, NADUVILEVALAPPIL HOUSE, KOTTALL DESOM, CHALAKUDY (P.O), THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SMT.K.V.BHADRA KUMARI RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER ------------------------- SHANMUGHAN, S/O.RAMAN, VELLAMTHARA HOUSE, CHEMPUCHIRA (P.O), MATTATHOOR VILLAGE, W. CHALAKUDY VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. * * * * * * * * * * * * * W.P.C No.14638 of 200 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 17th day of May 2010 J U D G M E N T Basant,J The petitioner is the respondent in an original petition pending before the Family Court. In that proceedings, her husband, the respondent herein (the petitioner therein) has claimed amounts from her. Along with the original petition, an application for interim attachment was also filed. Ad interim attachment was ordered. The petition was posted from time to time. When the matter came up on 02/03/2010, the learned Judge noted that the respondent - the petitioner herein had prayed for time. For enquiry, the matter was posted to 29/04/2010. But the ad interim attachment ordered was directed to continue until further orders. 2. The petitioner claims to be aggrieved by the impugned order. What is her grievance? What happened on 29/04/2010? Was the petition for attachment taken up for consideration and a decision rendered? The learned counsel for the petitioner is unable to give details to this court. A reading of W.P.(C).No.14638/10 : 2 : Exts.P7 and P8 make it crystal clear that the ad interim attachment ordered was to continue only till I.A.No.3083/09 was taken up for hearing and disposal on merits. We find absolutely no reason to invoke our extraordinary constitutional jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India to interfere with the impugned order. We are satisfied that it must be made clear and the court below must dispose of I.A.No.3083/09 on merits as expeditiously as possible if the same has not already been disposed of. Compliance shall be reported to this Court. 3. This writ petition is dismissed with the above observations. 4. Communicate a copy of this order to the Family Court immediately. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) (M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE) jsr // True Copy// PA to Judge W.P.(C).No.14638/10 : 3 : W.P.(C).No.14638/10 : 4 : W.P.(C).No.14638/10 : 5 : R.BASANT & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. .No. of 200 ORDER/JUDGMENT 29/07/2009