IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH JANUARY 2010 / 30TH POUSHA 1931 WP(C).No. 1751 of 2010(R) ------------------------- OPG&W.214/2009 of FAMILY COURT, THODUPUZHA .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- SHINE, AGED 35 YEARS,. S/O.KRISHNAN, KATTAKKATH HOUSE, MEKADAMBU PO, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. DR.GEORGE ABRAHAM RESPONDENT(S): --------------- SHEEJA, AGED 33 YEARS, D/O.KARUNAKARAN, MEPUTHUSSERY HOUSE, CHITHIRAPURAM PO,KUNJITHANNI VILLAGE, DEVIKULAM TALUK. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.M.JOSEPH & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C)No.1751 OF 2010 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 20th day of January, 2010 JUDGMENT Joseph, J. Ext.P3 is under challenge in this writ petition. The prayers in this writ petition are : 1) to issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to quash Ext.P3 2) to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the Family Court, Thodupuzha to decide the preliminary issue raised by the petitioner as to whether that court has jurisdiction to consider O.P.(G&W) No.214/2009 preferred by the respondent. 2. Petitioner and respondent are husband and wife. The marriage between them was solemnized in 2001 and a minor child was born in 2003. By Ext.P3 order dated 21-12-2009, the Family Court, Thodupuzha ordered as follows : “For production of the child, adjourned to 28-12-2009”. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the case stands WPC.No.1751/2010 Page numbers adjourned to 21-01-2010. According to the petitioner, petitioner disputes the jurisdiction of the Family Court, Thodupuzha. The petitioner has filed a petition to decide the question of maintainability of the petition before the Family Court on the first posting date itself. It is also submitted that the matter was heard and orders are yet to be pronounced. Yet the Family Court has directed production of the child. In other words, the complaint is that a court without jurisdiction has proceeded to pass Ext.P3 order. We are not inclined to interfere with Ext.P3 order. But at the same time, we feel that the petitioner may be entitled to relief claimed as prayer No.2 . Accordingly while rejecting the writ petition, in so far as it relates to prayer No.1, there will be a direction to the Family Court, Thodupuzha to take a decision on the preliminary issue raised as to whether the court has jurisdiction in O.P.(G&W)214/2009 at the earliest. K.M.JOSEPH, JUDGE P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE sv. WPC.No.1751/2010 Page numbers