Bhaskaran, J.

This appeal is filed by the petitioner before the Family Court, Thiruvalla. The petition was filed by Suprabha through her next friend for realization of Rs.9,55,160/- being the value of the gold ornaments, cash paid and other movables given at the time of marriage of Suprabha with Santhosh. The respondents before the Family Court are the parents of Santhosh as Santhosh committed suicide subsequent to the marriage. There is also a child born in the wedlock. The case of the appellant is that Suprabha was mentally and physically tortured in the house of the respondents and she became a mental patient. The ornaments belong to her and the child were taken by respondents and not returned to her. The Family Court returned the petition stating that one of the parties to the marriage is no more and hence the petition is not maintainable before the Family Court.

2. In this appeal, the appellant challenges the finding of the Family Court that the petition is not maintainable before the Family Court. The petition is filed under Rule 3 of the Family Courts (Kerala) Rules, 1989, and S.26 and Order VII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

3. The question for consideration in this appeal is whether the subject-matter of the dispute between the parties to the litigation comes under S.7 of the Family Courts Act, 1984, which enumerates the cases coming under the jurisdiction of the Family Court. S.7 of the Act reads:

7. Jurisdiction- (1) Subject to the other provisions of this Act, a Family Court shall, -

(a) have and exercise all the jurisdiction exercised by any district court or any subordinate civil court under any law for the time being in force in respect of suits and proceedings of the nature referred to in the Explanation; and

(b) be deemed, for the purposes of exercising such jurisdiction under such law, to be a district court or, as the case may be, such subordinate civil court for the area to which the jurisdiction of the Family Court extends.

Explanation:- The suits and proceedings referred to in this sub-section are suits proceedings of the following nature namely,

(a) suit or proceeding between the parties for a decree of nullity or marriage (declaring the marriage to be null and void or, as the case may be, annulling the marriage) or restitution of conjugal rights or judicial separation or dissolution of marriage;

(b) a suit or proceeding for a declaration as to the validity of a marriage or as to the matrimonial status of any person;

(c) a suit or proceeding between the parties to a marriage with respect to the property of the parties or of either of them;

(d) a suit or proceeding for an order or injunction in circumstances arising out of a marital relationship;

(e) a suit or proceeding for a declaration as to the legitimacy of any person;

(f) a suit or proceeding for maintenance;

(g) a suit or proceeding to the guardianship of the person or the custody of, or access to, any minor.

(2) Subject to the other provisions of this Act, a Family Court shall also have and exercise, -

(a) the jurisdiction exercisable by a Magistrate of the first class under Chapter IX (relating to order for maintenance of wife, children and parents) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974); and

(b) such other jurisdiction as may be conferred on it by any other enactment.

According to the learned counsel for the appellant, the case can come either under clause (c) or clause (d) of Explanation to S.7 of the Act. To attract clause (c), it should be a suit or proceeding between the parties to a marriage with respect to the property of the parties or of either of them. To come under clause (d), it should be a suit or proceeding for an order or injunction in circumstances arising out of a marital relationship. It may be because the petitioner’s counsel was not sure about the provision under which the O.P. was filed that the relevant clause in S.7 is not quoted in the O.P.

4. First we will consider whether clause (c) of Explanation to S.7 of