BABU JOSEPH KAREETHARA Vs. MOLY KALAPPURAKKAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners have challenged Exts.P6 and P7 orders passed by the Family Court, Kottayam in I.A.Nos.348 of 2003 and 791 of 2004 in O.P.No.34 of 2003. The orders are dated 08-10-2004. The present writ petition is seen to have been filed on 30-06-2006. But it has been disclosed that earlier writ petition filed as W.P.(C).No.35820 of 2004, challenging the said orders, had been permitted to be withdrawn with liberty to move again. The circumstances, in which the present writ petition came to be filed, could be stated herein below.

(2.) The petitioners in the writ petition, who are represented by a power of attorney, are husband and wife employed at Kuwait. They had purchased certain extent of properties from one Baby George. The first respondent herein is the wife of Baby George and respondents 2 and 3 are their minor children. The first respondent herein had filed O.P.No.34 of 2003 before the Family Court, Kottayam while her husband was alive, contending that the properties purchased by her husband in his name was by using her funds and he had been fraudulently sold away them to the petitioners herein, and they were to be recovered in her favour. In the course of the proceedings, the first respondent-husband had passed away.

(3.) The petitioners herein had authorised one Baby Joseph, who was their power of attorney holder for partaking in the proceedings. They referred to the applications filed by the power of attorney holder seeking permission to represent their cause, and Ext.P3 is the request made in this behalf. It is submitted that when Baby George--the husband was alive, counseling was in progress and the presence of the petitioners were not essential, but they had seen to it that a written statement was duly filed. But on 24-01-2004, since the power of attorney holder was not present in court, they were set ex parte.