Ram Mohan Reddy, J.

The rejection of the petitioner's application under Order VII Rule 11 r/w Section 151 CPC by Order dt. 11.11.2007 in M.C.No. 1195/98 of the Principal Judge, Family Court, Bangalore, has resulted in this petition invoking Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

2. The threshold contention of the learned Counsel for the respondent over the maintainability of the writ petition deserves to be rejected, since the petitioner can invoke the power of superintendence under Article 227 of the Constitution, calling in question the order impugned of the Family Court.

3. Briefly stated facts are that a female child by name Kum. Aaruni was born on 7.12.1994 to the petitioner from out of the wedlock between the parties and on 11.12.1998, a joint petition filed invoking Sec. 13B of The Hindu Marriage act 1955, for short ‘Act' for a decree of divorce by mutual consent and child's custody in terms of the compromise, was accordingly allowed by order dtd. 12.04.1999 of the Family Court. The arrangement over the custody of the child and visitation rights having led to certain alleged difficulties in its implementation, perhaps, impelled the parties to file separate appl