MUKUNDAN Vs. KATYUSHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner and the respondent are husband and wife. Their relationship is strained and various proceedings are pending between them in the Family Court, Palakkad. These proceedings are O.P.No.117/2010 filed by the petitioner for divorce, M.C.No.313/2010 filed by the respondent for maintenance, O.P.No.675/2010 filed by the respondent for return of gold and O.P.No.604/2011 filed by her for return of money allegedly given at the time of marriage.

(2.) It appears that M.C.No.313/2010 was posted for evidence on 16/3/2012, when, on behalf of the petitioner, his power of attorney holder filed Ext.P1 application seeking joint trial of all the cases. That petition was opposed by the respondent. The Family Court considered the application and dismissed the same by Ext.P5 order. It is Ext.P5 order, which is under challenge in this O.P. The reason stated by the Family Court is mainly that separate procedures have been laid down in the Family Court Acts in respect of proceedings governed by Code of Civil Procedure and Code of Criminal Procedure and therefore, joint trial is impermissible. In this context, the Family Court has made reference to Sections 10 and 19 of the Act to justify its conclusion.

(3.) We have heard the learned counsel for both sides.