JUDGMENT

Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan, J Notice to respondents dispensed with preserving their right to seek rehearing of this matter, if aggrieved by the contents of this judgment.

2. The petitioner now faces Ext.P1 application under the Guardian & Wards Act and Ext.P10 application under Section 125 Cr.P.C. They are filed before the Family Court, Kollam. The petitioner's case is that the parties had litigations before the Family Court, Ernakulam and they had entered into Ext.P2 compromise settling all the issues and that the said compromise was accepted and acted upon. According to the petitioner, the terms of Ext.P2 governs the question of maintenance and also guardianship and custody. He pleads that Ext.P2 settlement has been honoured and therefore, the proceedings now initiated before the Family Court, Kollam are to be quashed.

3. In matters relating to proceedings akin to civil jurisdiction, the proper course would be to move the Court where the present proceedings are initiated and apprise that authority about the earlier litigations and the settlement. We, however, see that the petitioner is in Bangalore and if his case as shown on the basis of Ext.P2 is one that stand with formi