IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR THURSDAY, THE 22ND JANUARY 2009 / 2ND MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No. 1642 of 2009(S) ------------------------- OP.330/2007 of FAMILY COURT, KANNUR .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- A.P.JAYANANDAN S/O. GOVINDAN, AGED 39 YEARS, RESIDING AT RADHA VILAYA, P.O. KAKKAD, KANNUR. BY ADV. SRI.V.R.KESAVA KAIMAL SRI.N.M.MADHU RESPONDENT(S): --------------- T.K.SANDHYA D/O. GANDHARAN, AGED 31 YARS, RESIDING AT PUTHUPPANAM, NADAKKUTHAZHE VILLAGE, VADAKARA TALUK, KOZHIKODE. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX IN W.P.(C) NO.1642 OF 2009 EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION IN O.P.NO.330/2007 ON THE FILES OF THE FAMILY COURT, KANNUR. EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT DATED 21.2.2008 IN SUPPORT OF I.A.NO.151/2008 EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT DATED 19.7.2008 TO ADJOURN THE CASE. EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF I.A.NO.635 OF 2008 EXT.P5 TRUE COPY OF THE ADVANCE HEARING PETITION DATED 16.12.2008 EXT.P6 TRUE COPY OF THE PROOF AFFIDAVIT IN I.A.NO.635/2008 IN O.P.NO.330 OF 2007 //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. P.R. RAMAN & C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JJ. ********************************** W.P.(C) NO. 1642 OF 2009 ********************************** DAYED THIS, THE 22ND DAY OF JANUARY, 2009. J U D G M E N T --------------------- Raman, J. Despite service of notice by Special Messenger, the respondent did not appear on 21.1.2009. However, we adjourned the case to today. There is no appearance for the respondent. 2. The petitioner is the petitioner in O.P. 330/2007 on the file of the Family Court, Kannur, which is a petition for divorce. The same was dismissed for default on 23.9.2008. Thereafter, the petitioner, through his Power of Attorney Holder, filed I.A. 635/2007 for restoration of the petition. It is stated that the same was filed on 22.10.2008. Since that application was not taken up for consideration, petitioner filed another application seeking advancement of the case. Now the case stands posted to 16.2.2009. Since the petitioner is employed abroad and he is now in India, he contends that in case his application for restoration is allowed, he could be examined on the same day so as to avoid unnecessary hardship to come back to India again for giving evidence. He prays in such circumstances, for appropriate direction for passing expedite orders on the restoration application. 3. As a matter of fact, objection if any that may be raised by the respondent was attempted to be ascertained by issuing notice, which WP(C) 1642/2009 :2: however failed since the respondent did not appear. In the facts and circumstances, there will be a direction to the Family Court to consider and dispose of I.A. 635/2008 on the next posting date itself and if it is allowed, the court may consider the request of the petitioner to record his evidence in the matter. The writ petition is disposed of as above. (Issue urgent copy) P.R. RAMAN, ( JUDGE) C.T. RAVIKUMAR, (JUDGE) KNC/-