IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID TUESDAY, THE 26TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 7TH PHALGUNA 1929 WP(C).No. 3299 of 2008(S) ------------------------- OP.148/2006 of FAMILY COURT, KASARAGOD .................... PETITIONER: ------------ P.V.SAHIRA, AGED 23 YEARS, D/O KOHINOOR SHAFI, RESIDING AT PAKYARA, PALLIKKERE II VILLAGE, HOSDURG TALUK. BY ADV. SMT.C.G.PREETHA RESPONDENTS: ------------- C.M.ASHRAF, AGED 31 YEARS, S/O LATE C.H.MOHAMMEDKUNHI, MUBARAK MANZIL, PAKYARA, PALLIKKERE II VILLAGE, HOSDURG TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.M.THAMBAN SMT.T.SUDHAMANI THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 3299 of 2008(S) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXTS:- EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORIGINAL PETITION DATED 05/07/2006 IN O.P.NO.148/2006 BEFORE THE HONOURABLE FAMILY COURT, KASARAGOD EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE COUNTER AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE WIFE IN OP NO.148/2006 BEFORE FAMILY COURT, KASARAGOD EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE COUNTER AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE WIFE IN I.A.NO.379/2006 BEFORE FAMILY COURT, KASARAGOD EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 16/09/2006 IN I.A.NO.379/2006 OF THE HONOURABLE FAMILY COURT, KASARAGOD EXT.P5 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDING SHEET IN O.P NO.148/2006 ON THE FILES OF THE HONOURABLE FAMILY COURT, KASARAGOD. \\TRUE COPY// KURIAN JOSEPH & HARUN-UL-RASHID, JJ. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ W.P.(C) No. 3299 of 2008-S ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Dated this the 26th day of February, 2008 J U D G M E N T Kurian Joseph, J. Petitioner have approached this Court aggrieved by Ext.P5 order passed by the Family Court, Kasaragod, in the matter of visitorial rights of the child. According to the petitioner, the said order was passed modifying Ext.P4 order, without even a petition by the respondent. According to the respondent, even without the petition, it is open to the Family Court to pass appropriate orders in the family court matters, in the interest of the parties. We have no quarrel with the proposition. However, having regard to the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case and particularly, in view of the pendency of Ext.P4 order already passed by the Family Court for more than a year, it is only appropriate that any variation is made on a petition to that effect filed by any of the parties. Therefore, we set aside Ext.P5 order without prejudice to the right of the respondent to file a petition before the Family Court for appropriate modification of Ext.P4 order. The visitorial rights as per Ext.P4 order will continue. (KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE) (HARUN-UL-RASHID, JUDGE) ms