2025:KER:26254 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.B. SNEHALATHA WEDNESDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF MARCH 2025 / 5TH CHAITHRA, 1947 OP (FC) NO. 170 OF 2025 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN IA.NO.3 OF 2025 IN OP NO.1887 OF 2024 OF FAMILY COURT,KOZHIKODE PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS NO 2 & 3: 1 RAJASREE AGED 58 YEARS W/O GOPALAKRISHNAN RESIDING AT SOUPARNIKA , EDAKAD POST P.O, PUTHIYANGADI VILLAGE, KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673005 2 GOPALAKRISHNAN AGED 68 YEARS S/O K.G.K KURUP RESIDING AT SOUPARNIKA , EDAKAD POST P.O, PUTHIYANGADI VILLAGE, KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673005 BY ADVS. K.B.SURESH SHIFA S. GOUTHAM SREEKUMAR RANJAN SURESH BINDU SREEKUMAR RESPONDENT/DEFENDANT: SREELAKSHMI E D/O SHAJI, RESIDING AT SRISOUDHAM, MAKKADA P.O, KAKKODY VILLAGE, KOZHIKODE, PIN-67361 1. PRESENTLY RESIDING AT DEVATHEERTHAM HOUSE, EDAKKAD P.O, PUTHIYANGADI VILLAGE, OP(FC).No.170 of 2025 2 2025:KER:26254 KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673000 THIS OP (FAMILY COURT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26.03.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: OP(FC).No.170 of 2025 3 2025:KER:26254 JUDGMENT Devan Ramachandran, J. The petitioners have filed this Original Petition seeking that this Court set aside an order passed by the learned family Court, Kozhikode, in I.A.No.03/2025 in O.P.No.1887/2024. Pertinently, the petitioners have chosen not to produce the order which is challenged on record; but they say that this is because they have not obtained a copy of the same until now. 2. Even though this petition, challenging an order of the learned Family Court is not maintainable without the said order being on record, we called for a report from the learned Family Court as to the above submissions of Sri.K.B.Suresh – learned Counsel for the petitioners. 3. The learned Family Court has now given us a report, saying that no one has applied for a copy of the order and that as soon as it is done, the certified copy will be issued. 4. Sri.K.B.Suresh – learned counsel for the petitioners, however, argued that his clients are entitled to a free copy from the learned Family Court and that they do not have to apply for a certified copy. OP(FC).No.170 of 2025 4 2025:KER:26254 5. We do not propose to enter into the merits of the afore assertion, because, it is ex facie clear from the prayers in this Original Petition that the petitioners do not seek any direction against the learned Family Court qua the allegation that they have not been issued with a certified copy of the order in question. 6. To reiterate and as we have said above, this Court is incapable of considering the merits of an order which has not been produced. 7. Obviously, the petitioners will have to invoke other remedies at the relevant time. This Original Petition is, consequently, dismissed. Sd/- DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, JUDGE Sd/- M.B.SNEHALATHA, JUDGE Mms OP(FC).No.170 of 2025 5 2025:KER:26254 APPENDIX OF OP (FC) 170/2025 PETITIONERS EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 2.12.24 ISSUED BY THE KERALA BANK , WEST HILL KOZHIKODE Exhibit P2 A TRUE AFORESAID SALE AGREEMENT DATED 4.1.25 EXECUTED BETWEEN THE PETITIONERS 1 AND 2 AND THE PURCHASER Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ATTACHMENT NOTICE DATED 15.2.25 ISSUED BY THE FAMILY COURT KOZHIKODE