IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH AUGUST 2010 / 27TH SRAVANA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 3230 of 2010() ------------------------- CRA.174/2009 of ADDL.SESSIONS COURT, ALAPPUZHA .................... PETITIONER: --------------- JACOB OOMMEN, S/O.A.O.OOMMEN, AGED 40 YEARS, ALUMMOOTTIL PRAKASH VILLA, KOLLAKADAVU.P.O., CHERIYANADU VILLAGE, CHENGANNUR. BY ADV. SRI.RINNY STEPHEN CHAMAPARAMPIL RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. LATHA JACOB, LOURDHPURAM HOUSE, KOMALLOOR.P.O., KARIMULACKAL, NOW RESIDING AT ALUMMOOTTIL PRAKASH VILLA, KOLLAKKADAVU.P.O., CHERIYANADU VILLAGE, CHENGANNUR TALUK. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY THE S.I OF POLICE, VENMONY POLICE STATION, THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.KAMMAPPU THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V.RAMKUMAR, J. ---------------------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.3230 of 2010 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 18th day of August, 2010 ORDER The petitioner who is the husband of the first respondent and counter petitioner in M.C.No.53 of 2008 filed by the first respondent under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 seeks a direction to the Additional Sessions Judge-I, Mavelikkara to pass orders on Crl.M.P.No.388/2009 (delay petition) in Crl.Appeal No.174 of 2009 and on Annexure-A3 stay petition. In the said appeal, he has challenged the order passed by the Magistrate granting residence order as well as maintenance. The main reason for not disposing Crl.M.P.No.388 of 2009 was due to the non- appearance of the first respondent herein in the appeal filed by the petitioner. Going by the report dated 12/8/2010 from the Additional Sessions Judge-I, Mavelikkara the first respondent herein has now entered appearance on 11/8/2010 and the case stands posted to 16/8/2010. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that on 16/8/2010 the Sessions Judge was pleased to condone delay and Annexure- A3 stay petition stands posted to 20/8/2010. I see no reason to Crl.M.C.No.3230/2010 : 2 : assume that the Sessions Judge will not take up for consideration the stay petition and pass appropriate orders on the stay petition. This Criminal M.C. is disposed of directing the Sessions Judge to take up for consideration and dispose of the stay petition after giving both sides an opportunity of being heard. V.RAMKUMAR, JUDGE skj