Pius C. Kuriakose, J.

Under challenge in this Writ Petition filed under Art. 227 of the Constitution by the petitioner who is the wife of the respondent is Ext. P4 common order passed by the Family Court in LA. No. 961/07 in O.P. 751/07, LA. No. 178/08 in I.A. 961/07 in O.P. 751/07. Apart from the prayer to set aside Ext. P4, the following prayers are also sought in this Writ Petition:-

a. To declare that a person will be entitled to seek relief under S. 18 and 19 of the D.V. Act from the Family Court also by invoking S. 26 of the D.V. Act.

b. To declare that I.A. 961/07 and LA. No. 178/07 in LA. No. 961/07 filed in O.P. 75/07 before the Family Court, Kannur are entitled to be decided on merit by the Family Court.

c. To issue a writ of prohibition restraining the Family Court, Kannur from proceeding further with O.P. No. 75/2007 before and without deciding I.A. 961/2007 and I.A. 178/2007 on merit.

d. To issue a writ of mandamus directing the Family Court to dispose of I.A.s on merit within a time frame to be fixed by this Hon'ble Court.

e. To issue such other orders, directions or writs as may be prayed for and that this Hon'ble Court may deem fit on the facts and circumstances of the case.

We find that the petitioner filed O.P. 751/07 before the Family Court, Kannur under S. 18(2) of the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 for past maintenance. I.A. 961/07 was filed by her under S. 26(1) and (2) of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. The prayer in the above I.A. was for relief under Ss. 18 and 19 of the D.V. Act, 2005 i.e., a residence order to reside in the shared house and a protection order restraining the respondent from committing Domestic Violence. Ext. P1 produced along with the O.P. is copy of the Original Petition. Ext. P2 is copy of the affidavit filed by the petitioner in support of the I.A. 961/07. I.A. 178/08 was filed as an I.A. in I.A. 961/07 under S. 18(e) of the D.V. Act for protection order and for prohibiting alienation of the house situated in Bangalore. Ext. P3 is copy of the affidavit in support of the I.A. 178/08. By Ext. P4 the learned Family Court dismissed both the I.A.s taking the view that the Family Court, Kannur does not have jurisdiction to pass an interim order under S. 18 and 19 of the D.V. Act, 2005. The petitioner points out that she had filed a petition under S. 12 of the D.V. Act for relief under Ss. 18, 19, 20, 22 and 23(2) of the D.V. Act before the Addl. C.J.M's Court, Thalassery as M.C. 51/07. Petitioner filed Tr. P.(Crl). 80/07 seeking transfer of the above M.C. Ext. P5 is copy of the order in the above Transfer Petition which was dismissed by the High Court mainly on the reason that in the light of the decision in M.A. Mony Vs. M.P. Leelamma and Another, the prayer to transfer a case from the criminal court to Family Court may not be maintainable, after recording the submissions of the counsel for the petitioner that the Family Court has the requisite legal competence under S. 26 of the D.V. Act to grant relief which are grantable under the D.V. Act and the petitioner intends to seek relief from the Family Court. The petitioner submits that in the light of the observation in Ext. P5 that the petitioner is at liberty to seek relief from the Family Court under S. 26 of the D.V. Act if so advised. The petitioner filed Ext. P6 affidavit before the C.J.M's Court with a prayer to close or dismiss the proceeding before the C.J.M's Court as not pressed without prejudice to the petitioner's right to file similar petition before the Family Court.

2. According to the petitioner Ext. P4 is an illegal order and has to be corrected by this Court under Art. 227. The respondent has filed a counter affidavit wherein it is contended that the Family Court, Kannur is completely justified in passing Ext. P4 common order stating that the petition filed under Ss. 18 and 19 of the D.V. Act could be considered only at the final stage. According to the respondent a careful readin