Devan Ramachandran, J.

The petitioner challenges the order of the learned Family Court, Ernakulam, in IA No.9 of 2025 in OP No.2521 of 2023.

2. Shorn of unnecessary details, the aforesaid Original Petition was filed by the respondent, seeking, inter alia, that he be declared the sole owner of certain properties that remain in the joint names of the parties; and the petitioner says that she did not file her objections to it only because there was an “anti-injunction suit” already filed in a competent court in Australia, in which, an order had been issued against the parties not to initiate litigation in India. She says that, however, the said order has now been modified by the Australian Court, thus permitting both parties to apply to the Indian courts for declaration of their respective assets, and that the respondent – husband has already done so, which has been allowed. She says that, nevertheless, when she made the application in terms of the above said liberty reserved to her by the Australian Court, it was rejected by the learned Family Court through the Ext.P17 order; and therefore, that she has been constrained to approach this court.

3. Smt. R. Leela – learned counsel for the