Courts must adhere to due process and statutory requirements when disposing of cases to ensure justice is served.

JUDGMENT Devan Ramachandran, J.

We choose to be circumspect and very brief in this judgment because, we find certain disturbing issues in this case.

2. Interestingly, the learned counsel on both sides admit that the learned Family Court has disposed of the main Original Petition, without completion of pleadings and without allowing the parties to trial; perhaps without understanding the true import of the directions of this Court in the judgment in OP(FC)No.497/2025 – a copy of which is on record as Annexure A3.

3. Without being recriminatory in our tone, it is essential that the Courts dispose of matters only as per law and following the statutory scheme.

4. In Annexure A3 judgment, we created an arrangement, making it clear that the same would continue until such time as a final decision was taken by the learned Family Court. Obviously, it is for the learned Court to have disposed of the Original Petition, as per law, after affording necessary opportunities to both sides.

5. Pertinently, it is admitted by both sides that the learned Court did not allow the parties to trial, or to record evidence; but still went on to dispose of the Original Petition.

6. We find great force in the afore submissions of the learned counsel for the parties.

We, therefore, allow this Appeal and set aside the impugned judgment and decree; with a consequential direction to the learned Family Court to reconsider GOP No.1163/2025, as per law, after affording necessary opportunities to both sides, without any avoidable delay.

After we dictated this part of this judgment, Sri.M.S.Amal Dharsan – learned counsel for the appellant, pointed out a practical difficulty for his client to abide by the directions of ours in Annexure A3 judgment, saying that she is a working woman and therefore, finding it difficult to go to Thrissur to collect the children and to return them there. He, therefore, prayed that his client be allowed to collect the children from Thrissur; while, the respondent be directed to take them back from Ernakulam.

We record with appreciation that Sri.R.Sanjith – learned counsel for the respondents, acceded to the afore suggestion.

Therefore, in addition to our directions in Annexure A3 judgment, we order that the arrangement thereof will stand modified to the effect that the mother will collect the children into her interim custody every Friday from Thrissur; while, they will be returned back to their father’s custody on every Sunday. For this purpose, the father will collect the children from the front of the gate of the residential house of the mother at Ernakulam.

Sd/-