IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID TUESDAY, THE 1ST JULY 2008 / 10TH ASHADHA 1930 Mat.Appeal.No. 89 of 2007() --------------------------- OP.360/2006 of FAMILY COURT, THIRUVALLA .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER: --------------------------------- RENI JESSON, AGED 27 YEARS, D/O. V.C.ABRAHAM, VANETHU PUTHEN VEEDU, EDAPPAVOOR P.O., EDAPPAVOOR MURI, AYROOR VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.P.HARIDAS RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS ------------------------- 1. JESSON JACOB JOHNS, BETHESTHA HOUSE, CHERIYANADU P.O., CHENGANNUR TALUK. 2. JACOB JOHNSON, F/O. 1ST RESPONDENT, BETHESTHA HOUSE, CHERIYANADU P.O., CHENGANNUR TALUK. BY ADVS. SRI.S.SUBHASH CHAND FOR R1,2 SRI.SATHISH NAINAN[CONCILIATOR] THIS MATRIMONIAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: KURIAN JOSEPH & HARUN-UL-RASHID, JJ. ---------------------------------------------------------------- MAT. APPEAL NO. 89 OF 2007 ---------------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 1st day of July, 2008 JUDGMENT Harun-Ul-Rashid, J. This appeal is filed by the petitioner in O.P. No.360 of 2006 on the file of the Family Court, Thiruvalla. The appeal is directed against the judgment dated 2.2.2007 dismissing the Original Petition filed for recovery of patrimony. The parties to this appeal are referred to as petitioner and respondents as in the Original Petition. 2. The impugned judgment was passed by the Family Court without trial. The learned Family Court Judge insisted the petitioner to go with the first respondent and hand over the original deposit receipts to the respondents. It is submitted that inspite of the objections raised by the petitioner, the learned Judge passed the impugned judgment directing the petitioner to hand over the Fixed Deposit receipts to the respondents. The Family Court dismissed the Original Petition holding that the petitioner had wilfully withheld the Fixed Deposit receipts. Mat. Appeal No.89/2007 2 3. We interacted with the parties on 25.3.2008, 8.4.2008, 10.4.2008 and 27.5.2008. We had the assistance of the learned conciliator-cum- mediator Adv. Sri. Sathish Nainan. The parties also received medical assistance of Dr. A. Prakash Chandran of Dhanya Nursing Home, Palarivattom. After elaborate discussions with the parties, we find that reunion is a remote possibility. On 10.4.2008 the parties settled the issues before this Court in the presence of the leaned conciliator-cum-mediator. They agreed to file a joint petition under Section 10 A of the Indian Divorce Act. An agreement was also arrived at in respect of monetary claims, custody of the child and the property to be conveyed in the name of the child and those were recorded. Subsequently when the parties appeared before this Court on 27.5.2008, respondents 1 and 2 retracted from the terms agreed to by them and took the stand that they are not prepared to convey the property as agreed. In the circumstances, we have decided to proceed with the matter on merits. The terms agreed to did not work out and, therefore, the order dated 10.4.2008 stands recalled. 4. We find that the trial court has not gone into the issues on merits. It is only in the interests of justice and in the interests of the parties that the case be decided on merits after giving an opportunity to the parties to Mat. Appeal No.89/2007 3 substantiate their case. Hence, the judgment under appeal is set aside. The case is remitted to the Family Court. The Family Court is directed to dispose of the matter as above expeditiously. The Matrimonial Appeal is allowed as above. There will be no order as to costs. (KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE) (HARUN-UL-RASHID, JUDGE) sp/ Mat. Appeal No.89/2007 4 KURIAN JOSEPH & HAURN-UL-RASHID, JJ. Mat.Appeal NO. 89/2007 JUDGMENT 1st July, 2008 Mat. Appeal No.89/2007 5 KURIAN JOSEPH & HAURN-UL-RASHID, JJ. Mat. Appeal No.89/2007 O R D E R 10TH APRIL, 2008 Mat. Appeal No.89/2007 6