THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SHRI MADAN B. LOKUR AND THE HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.34609 OF 2011 DATED:29.12.2011 Between: Smt. K. Sri Rekha … Petitioner And The Hon’ble Family Court City Civil Courts, Secunderabad Rep. by its Hon’ble Family Judge City Civil Courts, Secunderabad and other … Respondents THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SHRI MADAN B. LOKUR AND THE HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO.34609 OF 2011 ORDER: (per the Hon’ble the Chief Justice Shri Madan B. Lokur) The prayer made in this writ petition is for a direction to call for the records of O.P. No.312 of 2009 on the file of the Family Court, at Secunderabad, and to declare “the same” as contrary to law and violative of the Marriage Laws (Amendment) Act, 1999 read with other provisions of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 deleting the ailment of epilepsy as a ground for granting divorce. 2. In sum and substance, the contention of the petitioner is that the proceedings initiated by her husband for declaring their marriage null and void on the ground that the petitioner had epilepsy are not maintainable. 3. The petitioner moved an application before the Family Court under Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure requesting the Family Court to dismiss O.P. No.312 of 2009. That application was dismissed by a detailed order dt.30.7.2010. The Family Court has gone into the issue of the maintainability of the petition not only on the ground of epilepsy but also on the ground that there is no concealment of a material fact at the time of marriage. Trial in the case has still to take place. 4. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is effectively directed against the order passed by the Family Court on 30.7.2010. It is now well settled that no writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is maintainable against an order passed by a judicial forum. That apart, learned counsel for the petitioner admits that there are other remedies available to have the order dt.30.7.2010 set aside. 5. Under these circumstances, we are not inclined to entertain this writ petition. 6. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. Miscellaneous application is also dismissed. __________________ MADAN B. LOKUR, CJ _______________ SANJAY KUMAR, J 29-12-2011 bnr