IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 5TH PHALGUNA 1931 RP.No. 120 of 2010(S) --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.20970/2008 Dated 12/08/2008 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER/RESPONDENT -------------------------------- SHAJI, S/O. KARTHIKEYAN, AGED 40 YEARS, RESIDING AT GANDHI SADANAM, KARETTE, PULIMATH P.O., CHIRAYINKEEZH TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.DINESH RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT ------------------------- SANDHYA, W/O. SHAJI, AGED 27 YEARS, RESIDING AT SANDHYA BHAVAN, CHEMPAKASSERY, ADAYAMON P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SMT.K.KUSUMAM THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, HARUN-UL-RASHID, JJ. -------------------------------------------- R.P. NO. 120 OF 2010 IN W. P. C NO. 20970 OF 2008 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of February, 2010. O R D E R Ramachandran Nair, J. Heard counsel appearing for the review petitioner and counsel appearing for the respondent. Petitioner and respondent are husband and wife living separately. Various petitions for divorce, for restitution of conjugal rights, for custody of child, for recovery of money are pending before the Family Court, Nedumangad. When this Court was moved in writ proceedings by the respondent, a Division Bench of this Court granted respondent's request for joint trial of all the connected cases and besides granting the relief, this Court also gave day time custody of the child to the petitioner on every Sunday. However, it is specified in the judgment that custody of the child will be essentially with the sister of the petitioner, and petitioner will be in the company of the child during that period. Review petition is now filed stating that the petitioner's sister, who was entrusted with the custody of the child, 2 namely, Smt. Sulochana, is staying 25 KMs. away from the petitioner's house and therefore in the place of Sulochana, petitioner may be permitted to send another sister to collect the child and take care of the child in terms of the judgment. Further prayer is for extension of the period of custody of the child during holidays. Counsel appearing for the respondent strongly opposed and stated that all the cases pending are ready for disposal. We notice that Division Bench of this Court granted custody with the involvement of the elder sister of the petitioner for reasons though not stated in detail in the judgment. We do not think conditions need be modified particularly when respondent's counsel pointed out that the sister whom the petitioner wants to substitute for taking custody of the child is fairly a young lady and she may not show any interest in the child. We therefore reject the contention of the review petitioner. However, we feel that in order to put to an end to the litigation, all the cases should be tried together and disposed of at the earliest. We direct the Family Court Judge, Nedumangad to dispose of all the cases within a period of three months from the date of production of a copy of this order. Both the petitioner 3 and respondent will co-operate in the proceedings before the Family Court. R.P. is dismissed. (C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR) Judge (HARUN-UL-RASHID) Judge kk