JYOTHI K.R. Vs. SUKUMARAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is directed against Ext.P5 order dtd. 23/02/2023 in I.A.No.3/2022 in O.P.No.1149/2008. Petitioner/wife filed a petition by invoking the provisions of Ss. 7 (1) explanation (c) and (d) of the Family Courts Act, 1984. The aforementioned petition was filed on 19/08/2022 and in response to the aforementioned petition, respondent/husband appeared and an objection was filed. However, during the pendency of the aforementioned petition, an application has been filed under Order VI Rule 7 (d) of the Code of Civil Procedure for incorporating the additional relief of claiming compensation as provided under Sec. 22 of the Act. The said application has been rejected by the Family Court by Ext.P5 order on the ground that such reliefs cannot be claimed as per the provisions of Sec. 26 of the Act. It was held that Family Court had no original and direct jurisdiction to entertain the original petition for the reliefs under the 2005 Act as, in view of the provisions of Sec. 28 of the 2005 Act, the trial under the various provisions of the Ss. shall be governed by the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure whereas the Family Court cannot, in such circumstances, decide a petition filed seeking comprehensive and combined relief.

(2.) In support of the arguments, the counsel for the petitioner relied upon paragraph 36 of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Vaishali Abhimanyu Joshi v. Nanasaheb Gopal Joshi, 2017 KHC 6434.

(3.) We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, Ms.Dhanya P. Ashokan and proceed to decide the matter in the absence of any contesting respondents, as, despite service, there is no appearance for the respondents.