S SABU Vs. IBRAHIM KUTTY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) UNDER challenge in this original petition filed by the respondents in O.P. No.213/2010, who are respectively the husband, mother-in-law and brother-in-law of one Nejumunnisa challenging Exts.P3 and P4 orders passed by the Family Court, Alapuzha in two separate interlocutory applications filed by them in O.P. No.213/2010. The above original petition(O.P.213/2010) is filed by the parents of Nejumunnisa claiming return of the gold ornaments and the cash which , according to them, was entrusted with their son-in-law and his parents at the time of the marriage of their daughter. Ext.P4 is passed in I.A. No.1327/2012 . The prayer in that I.A. was that the trial of O.P. No.213/2010 be kept in abeyance till the final disposal of Session Case No.1002/2010 pending before the Addl. Sessions Court, Fast Track - 1 Alappuzha, wherein offences under Sections 498A, 304B read with Section 34 IPC is pending against the petitioners. Ext.P3 is passed in I.A. No.1310/2010. The prayer in I.A. No.1310/2012 was that in C.M.P. No.3152/2009 filed by the deceased Najumuneesa under the provisions of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act while she was alive be summoned as a document in O.P.No.213/2012.

(2.) THE learned Family Court dismissed the above I.A. by passing Ext.P3 observing that the evidence in the original petition is over and that the document sought to be summoned is not relevant for deciding the matter in controversy in the original petition. It is also observed that the petitioners could have obtained certified copy of the complaint and produced the same before the court so as to enable the court to pursue the document. In Ext.P4, the stay sought for was declined taking the view that the issues to be considered by the Session Court in I.A. No.1002/2012 and by the Family Court in O.P.No.213/2010 are entirely different. It is also observed by the Family Court in Ext.P4 that I.A. has been filed by the petitioners after the entire trial was over.