Dr. Amy Susan George v. Dr. Sam P. Mathew

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN** **&** **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.G. AJITHKUMAR FRIDAY, THE 23[RD] DAY OF DECEMBER 2022 / 2ND POUSHA, 1944** **OP (FC) NO. 671 OF 2022** **AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 20.10.2022 IN I.A.NO.1 OF 2022 IN O.P.NO.1252 OF 2021 ON THE FILE OF THE FAMILY COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM** ## **PETITIONER:** **DR. AMY SUSAN GEORGE, AGED 33 YEARS, D/O DR. GEORGE JACOB, RESIDING AT THYPARAMBIL HOUSE, CKRA-112/B, CHAKKALAMUKKU, SREEKARYAM, ULIYAZHTHURA VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-, PIN – 695017.** **BY ADVS. T.M.RAMAN KARTHA SYAMA MOHAN VIDYESWARI V. REVATHY M.A. GREESHMA T.G.** ## **RESPONDENT:** **DR. SAM P. MATHEW, AGED 35 YEARS, S/O A.P MATHEW, RESIDING AT PEEDIKAYIL HOUSE, PARUMALA, THIRUVALLA, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN – 689101.** **BY ADVS. NAVEEN T VINOJ RAJAN CHITHRA CHANDRASEKHARAN V.S.ABHISHEK BIJI A MANIKOTH** 2 O.P.(FC) No.671 of 2022 **THIS OP (FAMILY COURT) HAVING COME UP FOR FINAL HEARING ON 23.12.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** 3 O.P.(FC) No.671 of 2022 ## **JUDGMENT** ## P.G.Ajithkumar, J. The petitioner in O.P.No.1252 of 2021 on the file of the Family Court, Thiruvananthapuram, has filed this Original Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India seeking to set aside Ext.P5 order. I.A.No.1 of 2022 was filed by the petitioner seeking speedy disposal of O.P.No.1252 of 2021. It was dismissed as per Ext.P5 order. The petitioner challenges the legality of the said order and further seeks a direction to the Family Court, Thiruvananthapuram to dispose of O.P.No.1252 of 2021 within a time limit fixed by this Court. 2. On 06.12.2022, urgent notice on admission was directed to be served on the respondent. The respondent entered appearance through his learned counsel. 3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the respondent. 4. The petitioner stating that she is pursuing a course in D.M.Neurology in Institute of Neurology, Madras Medical 4 O.P.(FC) No.671 of 2022 College, Chennai, requested the Family Court, Thrivuananthapuram to dispose of O.P.No.1252 of 2021 at an early date. O.P.No.1252 of 2021 was filed by the petitioner seeking dissolution of her marriage with the respondent, which was solemnised on 22.04.2013. The Family Court as per Ext.P5 dismissed the application stating as follows,- “3. The respondent filed objection denying the petitioner's claims. The learned counsel submitted that two other connected petitions are also pending consideration of this court, and it will only be justice and proper to dispose of those cases together. He also argued that mediation and counselling in this case is not over, and it will not be proper to take evidence before completing the ADR process. 4. I hard both sides and perused the records. 5. I find that this case is of 2021. Cases filed from 2013 onwards is pending before this court for trial and disposal. The reason stated in the accompanying affidavit and petition is not sufficient to take up this case on priority. Moreover, two connected cases which require joint trial with this case are also pending. So far, no attempt were made to try for an amicable settlement of the issues involved. In these circumstances, I am not inclined to allow this petition at this stage. However, I make it clear that immediately after the ADR processes 5 O.P.(FC) No.671 of 2022 is over, this case and the connected cases will be clubbed together and, thereafter, the cases will be disposed of at the earliest.” 5. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that in the light of the pendency of O.P.No.1252 of 2021, she is not able to pursue her course in a satisfactory manner. Therefore, an early disposal of the said petition is highly essential. 6. The learned counsel for the respondent would submit that exploring possibility of a settlement, being the disputes relate to marital relationship, has now become a binding and necessary process, and therefore the view taken by the Family Court is correct. 7. When two other cases between the petitioner and the respondent are also pending consideration, and no counselling and mediation were attempted, the view taken by the Family Court cannot be said wholly incorrect. It is stated that counselling and mediation in the matter are yet to take place. In such circumstances, we are of the view that the Family Court may direct the parties to attend counselling. 6 O.P.(FC) No.671 of 2022 Possibility for mediation in the matter before proceedings further also to be explored. 8. The Apex Court in **Srinivas Rao K. v. D.A.Deepa** **[2013 (3) KHC 647]** held that in terms of Section 9 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 the Family Courts shall make all efforts to settle the matrimonial disputes through mediation. Even if the Counsellors submit a failure report, the Family Courts shall, with the consent of the parties, refer the matter to the mediation centre. 9. This Court in **George P.Cherukoth v. Mariyumma and another [2015 (5) KHC 152]** held that Section 89 of the Code of Civil Procedure,1908 empowers the Court to adopt the Alternate Dispute Resolution mechanism at any stage and does not prohibit a mediation post decree, and even at execution stage. There is no reason for any quarrel to the proposition that the matrimonial disputes, there shall be every endeavour on the part of the Family Court to resolve the dispute through alternative dispute resolution processes. 7 O.P.(FC) No.671 of 2022 10. Hence, we dispose of this Original Petition by directing the Family Court, Thiruvananthapuram to refer the parties for mediation. Depending upon the turnout of such mediation, the Family Court shall reconsider I.A.No.1 of 2022 in O.P.No.1252 of 2021 afresh and for enabling the Family Court for such re-consideration, Ext.P5 order is set aside. The Original Petition is disposed of accordingly. **Sd/-** **ANIL K. NARENDRAN, JUDGE** **Sd/-** **P.G. AJITHKUMAR, JUDGE** dkr 8 O.P.(FC) No.671 of 2022 ## **APPENDIX OF OP (FC) 671/2022** ## **PETITIONER EXHIBITS** |**EXHIBIT P1**|**TRUE COPY OF THE O.P.NO. 1252/2021**| |---|---| ||**FILED BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT**| ||**THIRUVANANTHAPURAM**| |**EXHIBIT P2**|**TRUE COPY OF M.C NO. 168/2021 FILED**| ||**BEFORE**<br>**THE**<br>**FAMILY**<br>**COURT**| ||**THIRUVANANTHAPURAM**| |**EXHIBIT P3**|**TRUE COPY OF O.P(G&W) NO.771/2021**| ||**FILED BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT**| ||**THIRUVANANTHAPURAM**| |**EXHIBIT P3(A)**|**TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DT.**| ||**15.03.2022 IN O.P.(G&W) NO. 771/2021**| ||**FILED BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT**| ||**THIRUVANNATHAPURAM**| |**EXHIBIT P4**|**TRUE COPY OF THE IA NO.1/2022 IN OP**| ||**NO.1252/2021 FILED BY THE PETITIONER**| ||**BEFORE**<br>**FAMILY**<br>**COURT,**| ||**THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DATED 10.8.2022**| |**EXHIBIT P4(A)**|**TRUE COPY OF OBJECTION FILED BY THE**| ||**RESPONDENT IN IA NO.1/2022 IN OP**| ||**NO.1252/2021 DATED 15.9.2022**| |**EXHIBIT P5**|**TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED**| ||**20.10.2022 IN IA NO.1//2022 IN OP**| ||**NO.1252/2021 OF THE FAMILY COURT,**| ||**THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.**|