K. ABRAHAM MATHEW, J.

1. The appellants are the plaintiffs and the respondents the defendants in O.S.No.274 of 2008 on the file of the Principal Sub Court, Palakkad. The plaint schedule property allegedly belonged to one Leela. She bequeathed it to her only son, Gopinathan and only daughter, the first defendant. Gopinathan also died. The first plaintiff is the wife and the second plaintiff the minor son of Gopinathan. On his death his ½ share in the plaint schedule property devolved equally on the plaintiffs. In the suit the plaintiffs pray for partition and separation of their ½ share in the property. Pending the suit the first defendant alienated the property to the additional second defendant. A contention was raised that the civil court has no jurisdiction to entertain the suit in view of Section 7(1)(c) and (d) of the Family Courts Act and only the Family Court has jurisdiction to entertain the dispute. Placing reliance on the decision in Anilkumar v. Sheela (2011(4) KLT 120) and Vasumathi v. Valsan 2011(3) KLT 638 the lower court upheld the contention and ordered to return the plaint to be presented before the Family Court. This order is assailed in this appeal.

2. H