IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.BHAVADASAN WEDNESDAY, THE 10TH AUGUST 2011 / 19TH SRAVANA 1933 OP (FC).No. 1991 of 2011(R) --------------------------------------- [O.P(G&W) 124/2011 OF FAMILY COURT,KOLLAM] .................... PETITIONER: ------------------- AMBILI GOPINATH,D/O.LEELA,AGED 34, POOVATHINKAL HOUSE,MEPPADAM CHERRY,CHELAKKARA, VILLAGE,THALAPPILL TALUK,THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.SIVARAJ. RESPONDENT: ---------------------- RAJESH MOHAN,S/O.MOHANAN,AGED 36 YEARS, THEKKEPLAVILA VEETTIL,KANAVELI CHERRY, THRIKKARUVA VILLAGE,KOLLAM TALUK,KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN – 690 001. BY ADVS. SRI.V.JAYAPRADEEP, SMT.V.V.RISANI, SRI.SANEESH KUNJUKUNJU. THIS OP (FAMILY COURT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/08/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: O.P.(FC).NO.1991/2011-R: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE O.P (G&W) NO.124/11 PENDING BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, KOLLAM. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE EMPLOYMENT CERTIFICATE OF PETITIONER DT. 09/05/2011 ISSUED BY RAYHAN EYE HOSPITAL, TRIPRAYAR. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE SALARY CERTIFICATE DTD 09/05/11 ISSUED TO PETITIONER BY RAYHAN HOSPITAL. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE I.A /2011 IN O.P(G&W) 124/11 PENDING BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, KOLLAM. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBIT: EXT.R1: COPY OF THE PETITION GIVEN BY THE FATHER OF THE PETITIONER. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. Prv. THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & P.BHAVADASAN, JJ. ----------------------------------- O.P(FC).No.1991 OF 2011 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 10th day of August, 2011 JUDGMENT Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan,J. This is a petition filed by the wife for a direction to the family court for expeditious consideration and disposal of an OP filed under the Guardians and Wards Act. The respondent husband has filed a counter affidavit. We do not deem it appropriate to look into the rival contentions on the merits of the matter since that is a matter which is in seizin of the family court. Having regard to the fact that the Guardians and Wards Act proceedings is initiated in 2011 and taking into consideration the pressure of work of the court below, we think the family court can complete the proceedings at any rate within a period of one year. We fix this outer time limit though the learned Judge of the OP(FC).1991/11 2 family court has given a report that he needs at least 7 months time to complete the proceedings. We adopt this approach because galloping in family jurisdiction may sometimes be against the institution of marriage and family, the sustenance of which is the prime goal sought to be achieved by the Family Courts Act. We further record the petitioner’s anxiety that the respondent is not scrupulously obeying interlocutory orders. If she has any specific complaint in that regard, the family court will consider that issue on any interlocutory application, even if necessary by recasting the time-table for the deposits. The original petition is ordered accordingly. Sd/- THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, Judge. Sd/- P.BHAVADASAN, Judge. kkb.16/8.