M RAMACHANDRAN PILLAI Vs. SOFIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has approached this Court seeking the following reliefs :

(2.) Conditional attachment is ordered on Ext.P6 petition. The petitioner filed Ext.P7 written statement to Ext.P5 suit and also Ext.P8 objection to Ext.P6 attachment petition. Ext.P9 is the advancement petition. The first respondent is working as Assistant Divisional Engineer in B.S.N.L. and she is getting a monthly salary of Rs. 50,000/- . According to the petitioner, he is getting an average monthly income of Rs. 20,000/- . Ext.P10 purports to be the certificate. Out of the amount, more than half is necessary for his journey alone in connection with the job.

(3.) We heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents. As far as the first prayer is concerned, we do not think that this is a case where we should consider the said prayer in a proceeding under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. We feel that however, we leave it pen to the petitioner to raise all the contentions before the Family Court, including the contention that the suit is not maintainable in view of the compromise between the parties. As far as the second prayer is concerned, we are of the following view : The petitioner has already filed objection to Ext.P6 and a final decision is yet to be taken. No doubt, learned counsel for the petitioner points out that the Family Court, Kollam is not sitting. However, in this regard, we direct that the objections of the petitioner will be considered by the District Judge-in-charge of the Family Court, Kollam, and a decision will be taken thereon at the earliest. As far as the attachment effected in the E.P. also, we relegate the petitioner to his remedies in regard to the same before the execution court itself.