IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR TUESDAY, THE 3RD JUNE 2008 / 13TH JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 16064 of 2008(K) -------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED / / IN EP.145/04EA.759/04 IN OS.291/1998 of PRL.MUNSIFF COURT, CHERTHALA .................... PETITIONER: ------------ P.V.XAVIER, PATTUKULANGARA VELIYIL THANNERMUKKOM, CHERTHALA. BY ADV. SRI.J.OM PRAKASH RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. N.RADHAKRISHNAN, S/O. NARAYANAN THAMPI SREERAMA SADANAM, VARANAD P.O.CHERTHALA. 2. V.L.MINIKUTTY,W/O.RADHAKRISHNAN VELIKKAKATHU VEEDU, VARANAD P.O.CHERTHALA. 3. ARJUN (MINOR) DO..DO.. THE 2ND RESPODNETNS IS THE GUARDING OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT) BY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, J. ------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.16064 of 2008 ------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd June, 2008. J U D G M E N T Petitioner filed a claim petition in E.P.No.146/2004 in O.S.No.291/1998, on the file of the Munsiff's Court, Cherthala. Execution petition was subsequently transferred to Family Court. Thereafter, under Ext.P2 order, learned Munsiff transferred the application filed by the petitioner also to the Family Court. It is challenged in this petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 2. The argument of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, relying on a Division Bench decision of this Court in Joseph v. Marium Thomas (2006 (1) KLT 894), is that the claim petition is not a matter which is to be tried by the Family Court, and Section 7 of the Family Courts Act, 1984, has no application in this case. On hearing the learned counsel, I do not find any reason to interfere with Ext.P2 order. The property claimed by the petitioner is charged under the decree in O.S.No.291/1998. Petitioner claims that W.P.(C) No.16064/2008 2 property cannot be proceeded with. When Execution Petition stands transferred to the Family Court, and the matter is pending before the Family Court, Munsiff cannot try the claim petition, as sought for by the learned counsel for the petitioner. In such circumstances, I do not find any reason to interfere with Ext.P2 order. Petition is dismissed. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE nj.