IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN FRIDAY, THE 6TH MARCH 2009 / 15TH PHALGUNA 1930 WP(C).No. 7299 of 2009(R) ------------------------- OPGW.446/2005 of FAMILY COURT,KOLLAM .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- ANITHA PILLAI, KALPAKAM, PADA SOUTH, KARUNAGAPPALLI. BY ADV. SRI.M.BALAGOVINDAN SRI.SUBHASH CYRIAC RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. V.SUNIL, KUNNATH HOUSE, VADAKKUMTHALA EAST P.O., KARUNAGAPPALLI. 2. RESMI PILLAI, KALPAKAM, PADA SOUTH, KARUNAGAPPALLI. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.RAMAN & P.S.GOPINATHAN, JJ. ------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.7299 of 2009 ------------------------------- Dated this the 6th March, 2009 J U D G M E N T Raman, J. Petitioner is aggrieved by the non-issuance of the order passed in I.A.Nos.511 and 512 of 2009 in O.P. (G & W) No.446 of 2005, on the file of Family Court, Kollam, seeking to re-open the evidence and to receive certain documents. According to her, pursuant to the closing of the evidence, allegation was raised by the first respondent that the petitioner do not possess any property. According to her, in order to prove that she has got property, she wanted to re-open the evidence, for which purpose, she filed the above interlocutory applications. She further submits that the court below has rejected her prayer, but a copy of the order has not been issued to her, so as to enable her to proceed with further. W.P.(C) No.7299 of 2009 2 2. Admittedly, there are some other matrimonial disputes pending between the parties as is evident from Ext.P2. The present matter relates to Guardian & Wards Act. True, that the petitioner’s ability to maintain the child and various other matters had been gone into by the Family Court. If the petitioner wants to prove that she had sufficient property to prove her financial position, and if she produces such document before the court below, on the date on which the case comes up for consideration, such documentary evidence shall be received, subject to objection, if any, filed by the other side, under Section 14 of the Family Courts Act. However, we do not think that in the factual situation, further proceedings pending before the Family Court should be interdicted for any reason. If, for any reason final orders are passed, ignoring any such document, it is always open to the petitioner to raise her grievance, after culmination of the proceedings. Reserving the W.P.(C) No.7299 of 2009 3 liberty of the petitioner to such right and subject to what is stated above, the writ petition is disposed of. P.R.RAMAN, JUDGE P.S.GOPINATHAN, JUDGE. nj.