IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR FRIDAY, THE 21ST AUGUST 2009 / 30TH SRAVANA 1931 WP(C).No. 24083 of 2009(Q) -------------------------------------- CMP. 2348/2009 IN MC.57/2009 of JUDL. FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-I, ALUVA .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------------- JOHNY A.C., S/O.LATE A.V.CHACKAPPAN, AREECKAL HOUSE, KIDANGOOR P.O., ANGAMALY, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.GEORGE JOHNSON RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ SUSY THOMAS, D/O.THOMAS, PANIKULANGARA HOUSE, AIYROOR P.O., KURUMASSERRY VIA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR,J. ------------------------------------------ W.P.C.NO. 24083 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------ Dated 21st August 2009 JUDGMENT Petitioner is the respondent and respondent, the petitioner in M.C.57/2009 on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate-I, Aluva. This petition is filed under Sections 12 and 19 of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act. Respondent filed Crl.M.P.2348/2009 under Section 23 of the Act for an interim order. Under Ext.P5 order interim order prohibiting petitioner from alienating the property was granted on 17/7/2009. This petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of Constitution of India to quash Ext.P4 complaint as well as Ext.P5 order and to direct the Magistrate to consider the objection raised by the petitioner in Crl.M.P.2348/2009. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner was heard. 3. Argument of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is that under Sub Section WPC 24083/09 2 3 of Section 26 of the Act in case any relief has been obtained by the aggrieved person, in any other proceeding other than a proceeding under the Act, she shall be bound to inform the Magistrate of the grant of such relief and even though first respondent has obtained an order of attachment from Family court, Ernakulam that fact was suppressed from the learned Magistrate and therefore learned Magistrate should not have granted interim order. 4. An interim order granted under Section 23 is appealable under Section 29 of the Act. When remedy of appeal is available to the petitioner, it is not for this court to quash Ext.P5 order exercising the extraordinary powers under Article 226/277 of Constitution of India. 5. Learned counsel appearing for petitioner submitted that Sub Section 2 of Section 25 of the Act enables the Magistrate, on the application of either the aggrieved person or the respondent to modify or revoke the order passed earlier and when petitioner has filed objection to the petition filed by the respondent for interim order respondent, learned Magistrate is to dispose that application. It is submitted that WPC 24083/09 3 application is not being disposed and a direction be issued to the Magistrate to dispose the application. 6. If petitioner has filed an application under Sub Section 2 of Section 25 of the Act to modify or revoke the interim ex-parte order passed under Section 23, Magistrate is to dispose the petition immediately. If petitioner files an application under Section 25(2), Magistrate to dispose the same without delay. M.SASIDHARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE. uj.