BAIJU Vs. VALSALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Whether a revision will lie against an interlocutory order passed by the Family Court is one of the questions to be considered in this Civil Revision Petition. Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 reads as follows:

(2.) Though the Civil Revision Petition is liable to be dismissed on that sole ground I may also refer to the factual situation in the instant case. This Civil Revision Petition is filed against the order dated 3-7-2003 in I.A. No. 1080/2002 in O.P. No. 458/1998 on the file of the Family Court, Kottayam. The application was filed for referring the respondent to the Medical College Hospital, Kottayam for assessing infertility. The original petition is filed praying for a decree of divorce. It is submitted that the grounds taken are matrimonial fraud and cruelty, matrimonial fraud in the sense that the respondent suppressed her incapacity to conceive. Admittedly the petitioner has treated the respondent in several hospitals including the hospitals at Kottayam. It is the submission that of the two doctors from Kottayam, one did not rum up to tender evidence and the other is laid up. It is for the petitioner to take appropriate steps in such circumstances. On that ground the Family Court cannot be faulted in having rejected the petition, particularly one filed after closing the evidence of both the parties, as stated at paragraph 6 of the order. Moreover, the Family Court has also observed that since the petitioner has taken the respondent for treatment before various doctors including the treatment under the Ayurvedic system "...the petitioner could produce documents showing the treatment and results and it will convince the court". Thus on merits also the petition is liable to be dismissed. It is accordingly dismissed.

(3.) Learned Counsel for the respondent submits that the petition filed in 1998 is still pending before the Family Court and the matter is delayed for the last three years because of the pendency of the Civil Revision Petition. The respondent may move the Family Court and taking note of the submissions as observed above, the needful action for expeditious disposal of the petition will be taken by the Family Court.