JUDGMENT Devan Ramachandran, J.

The petitioners challenge Ext.P2 order of the learned Family Court, Vadakara, through which, IA No.3/2025 filed by the respondent seeking amendments of the afore Original Petition filed by her has been allowed; thus permitting her to incorporate the explanation (d) to Section 7 (1) of the Family Courts Act, 1984 , (‘Act’ for short), as an additional provision therein.

2. Smt.Reeha Khader – learned counsel for the petitioners, vehemently argued that IA No.3/2025 could never have been allowed by the learned Family Court, when the husband of the respondent had been deleted from the party array; and that her clients had filed IA No.2/2024, challenging the maintainability of the said petition before it, in such scenario, but that it has been dismissed without properly appreciating the law involved.

3. We have examined the order impugned; and notice that, as said above, the only amendment allowed by the learned Family Court is that the respondent has been permitted to incorporate explanation (d) toSection 7(1) of the ‘Act’ as an additional provision in the pleadings.

4. The specific assertion of the petitioners is that the Original Petition is not maintain