AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
A.Muhamed Mustaque, J.
The petitioner herein is the respondent in I.A.No.1 of 2021 in O.P.(Div.) No.78 of 2017 on the file of the Family Court, Thiruvalla.
The respondent herein filed the above I.A. for interim custody of the child.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that a divorce was granted on mutual consent under Section 10A of the Divorce Act, 1869 (for short, the Act). Therefore, it is submitted that the present I.A. filed by the respondent under Section 44 of the Act is not maintainable. According to the learned counsel, Section 44 would apply in case a decree of divorce is granted under Section 10A of the Act. The petitioner also challenged before this Court a direction issued by the Family Court to produce the child. According to the petitioner, without considering the jurisdictional issue, the Family Court could not have passed an order directing the petitioner to produce the child. Though notice has been issued to the respondent through his counsel, none appears.
In view of the fact that the petitioner has raised a question relating to the jurisdiction of the Family Court, it is appropriate the Family Court shall pass orders on the jurisdiction before proceeding further. The direction to the petitioner to produce the child would depend upon the outcome of such a decision of the Family Court regarding jurisdiction.
With the above observations and directions, the Original Petition is disposed of.