IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN MONDAY, THE 19TH JANUARY 2009 / 29TH POUSHA 1930 WP(C).No. 4950 of 2008(S) ------------------------- OP.578/2007 of FAMILY COURT,ERNAKULAM .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- ANNAMMA.P.GEORGE, W/O.SCARIAH GEORGE, PARAYIL HOUSE, H.NO.34/524, PADIVATTOM P.O., EDAPPALLY SOUTH, KOCHI 682 024. BY ADV. SRI.M.K.DAMODARAN (SR.) SRI.NISHIL.P.S. SRI.GILBERT GEORGE CORREYA RESPONDENT(S): --------------- MINI JACOB, T.C.30/1202, CHIYYARAM P.O., THRISSUR DIST. KERALA, INDIA, R/AT 8904,JODI LANE, UNIT IA, DESPLAINES ILLINOIS 60016, USA REP. BY POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER P.C.KURIAKOSE, PODIMATTATHIL HOUSE, PAYYAPPADI P.O.,MEENADOM KARA MEENADOM VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. ADV. SRI.ALEX GEORGE FOR R1 SRI.KOSHY GEORGE FOR R1 SRI.GEORGE ZACHARIAH ERUTHICKEL FOR R1 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX(WP(C) 4950/2008) EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE O.P.578 OF 2007 BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, ERNAKULAM DTD. 24.4.2007. EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION IN I.A.1753 OF 2007 IN O.P.578/2007 FOR INTERIM CONDITIONAL ATTACHMENT OF THE PETITIONER'S PROPERTY DTD. 24.4.2007. EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 3.5.2007 IN I.A.1753 OF 2007 IN O.P.578 OF 2007 BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, ERNAKULAM. EXT.P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE RESPONDENT IN O.P.578 OF 2007 BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, ERNAKULAM. EXT.P5 TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN I.A.1753 OF 2007 IN O.P.578 OF 2007 BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, ERNAKULAM DTD. 20.6.2007. EXT.P6 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION IN I.A.2567 OF 2007 IN O.P.578 OF 2007 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, ERNAKULAM DTD. 20.6.2007. EXT.P7 TRUE COPY OF THE COUNTER AFFIDAVIT FILED ON BEHALF OF RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3 IN I.A.2733 OF 2007 IN O.P.578 OF 2007 BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, ERNAKULAM DTD.7.8.2007. EXT.P8 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED. 21.11.2007 IN I.A.1753 OF 2007 AND I.A.2567 OF 2007 IN O.P.578 OF 2007 BEFORE FAMILY COURT, ERNAKULAM. lgk K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & K SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ ........................................... WP(C).NO. 4950 OF 2008 ............................................ DATED THIS THE 19TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2009 JUDGMENT BALAKRISHNAN NAIR,J The Writ petitioner is the third respondent in O.P.578 of 2007, before Family Court, Ernakulam. Respondent herein has filed the application claiming an amount of Rs.91,88,150/- from the respondents therein. Respondents in that O.P are respectively, the former husband of the petitioner, (respondent herein), his father and mother. In the said O.P, the petitioner/wife claimed the amount, which the respondents therein allegedly received from her and misappropriated. According to her, they should have held the amount in trust and returned it, when called upon to do so. Along with the OP, respondent herein moved an application for attachment. Initially there was an interim attachment, which after hearing both sides, was made absolute as per Ext.P8. The said order is impugned in this writ petition. Third respondent therein, who is the petitioner herein, submits that there is no justification for attaching her property, who is the mother of the ex-husband of the respondent. Going by the pleadings in the original petition, respondent WP(C) 4950/2008 2 herein claims that the amount from her was received by the respondents and all of them are liable. Whether that is correct and whether petitioner herein is liable etc, are matters to be decided by Family Court. It is not proper for this court to go into those questions in a petition under Article 227 of Constitution of India. If the allegations of the respondent are correct, the impugned order may be necessary to safeguard her interest. In view of the above position, we find no reason to interfere with Ext.P8 under Article 227 of Constitution of India. Needless to say, while taking a final decision, trial court shall be guided by the materials and evidence before it and should not be influenced by the stand taken in the interim order. Writ petition is disposed of as above. K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE K SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE lgk/-