IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 5TH PHALGUNA 1931 WP(C).No. 6035 of 2010(R) ------------------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 17/02/2010 IN DIVORCE IA 106/10 IN OP.1124/2009 of FAMILY COURT, ALAPPUZHA .................... PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- 1. C.K.THOMAS, AGED 41 YEARS, S/O.LATE KOSHY, CHALIL HOUSE, VADAKKE MANKUZHY, PALLARIMANGALAM PO, MAVELIKARA. 2. BIJI P.THANKACHAN, AGED 36 YEARS, D/O.P.T.THANKACHAN, SUJUBHAVAN, THRIKKANNAMANGAL, KOTTARAKARA. BY ADV. SRI.A.SHAFEEK (KAYAMKULAM) RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- NIL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.M.JOSEPH & M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------ W.P.(C) No.6035 of 2010-R ---------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 24th day of February, 2010 J U D G M E N T K.M.Joseph, J. Petitioners are husband and wife. They have filed joint application for divorce under Section 10A of the Indian Divorce Act on 2.12.2009 and also for waiving the statutory period. The case was posted for appearance of the parties to 25.5.2010. It is stated that the petitioners wanted the case to be advanced to appear for counselling. The same was allowed. The efforts of the counselor was unsuccessful. The parties submit that the matrimonial relationship between them has been irretrievably broken down, and, therefore, they pray that the statutory period may be dispensed with. The Family Court dismissed the application for waiving the statutory period vide Ext.P5 order. Petitioners challenge Ext.P5 order of the Family Court and seek a direction to allow Ext.P4 petition to waive the statutory period. 2. Learned Family Judge found that this is not a long drawn litigation between the parties where the plea for waiver can be accepted. Further, the Family Court has relied WPC 6035/2010 -2- on the decision reported in 2009 (4) Civil Court Cases 378 (SC) which is the decision of the Apex Court to the effect that the Family Court has no jurisdiction to dispense with the waiting period provided by the Statute. 3. We heard the learned counsel for the petitioners. Learned counsel for the petitioners presses upon us the urgency. But, in view of the decision of the Apex Court, we do not think that we would be justified in interfering with Ext.P5 order and granting the reliefs sought for. Accordingly, the writ petition fails, and it is dismissed. (K.M.JOSEPH) JUDGE. (M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS) JUDGE. MS