Harilal, J.
The petitioner herein is the petitioner in O.P.(HMA) No.499/10 on the files of he Family Court, Thiruvalla. The above petition was field under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act for dissolution of the marriage. The respondent is the wife of the petitioner, who also preferred O.P.No.772/10 before the Family Court for realisation of money and gold ornaments. The Family Court has ordered joint trial of both petitions filed by the petitioner as well as the respondent. After taking evidence of the petitioner, the cases were posted on 20/1/2014 for further evidence. Since the petitioner was working in Border Security Force, he could not appear in person before the court. But the petitioner's counsel also failed to appear before the Family Court as he was engaged in another court. In short, neither the petitioner nor his counsel appeared before the court, when the case was taken up for hearing. Consequently, the court below dismissed both the original O.P(FC).429/14-R :2:
petitions. Aggrieved by the dismissal of O.P(HMA) No.499/10 the petitioner filed Ext.P2 restoration petition to restore the original petition which was dismissed on 20/1/2014 for default. The respondent had no objection in restoring Ext.P1 petition filed by the petitioner. But, despite several postings, the Family Court has not taken steps to consider Ext.P2 petition for restoration so far. This is the grievance projected in this O.P.(F.C).
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner advanced arguments in support of the grounds raised in this O.P. According to the learned counsel, the Family Court ought to have allowed Ext.P2 petition for restoration, particularly when the respondent had no objection in allowing the said petition. The learned counsel urged for issuing a direction to the Family Court, Thiruvalla, to dispose Ext.P2 petition for restoration within a specified time.
3. Going by the averments in the petition, it is seen that the respondent has no objection in allowing Ext.P2 petition for restoration. If that be so, the court below ought to have disposed of the said petition at the earliest. We do not find any O.P(FC).429/14-R :3:
reason to keep aside the petition without disposing the same on merit.
4. Having regard to the grievance of the petitioner, the Family Court, Thiruvalla is directed to dispose Ext.P2 application seeking restoration of the original petition, at the earliest, at any rate, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
This original petition is disposed of accordingly.
Sd/-
(V.K.MOHANAN, JUDGE)
Sd/-
(K.HARILAL, JUDGE)
okb.