(1.) WRIT Petition No. 10166/2006 is by the 1st defendant in O. S. No. 239/ 2002 and writ petition No. 10119/2006 is by the sole defendant in O. S. No. 264/2002 on the file of the Court of I Addl. Family Court at Bangalore.
(2.) WHILE O. S. No. 239/2002 is instituted by the sole plaintiff in the suit seeking for a relief of permanent injunction against the defendants from interfering with the plaintiffs possession and enjoyment of the suit schedule property and for other consequential relief. O. S. No. 264/2002 is by one Smt. Vimala/plaintiff who is also the plaintiff in O. S. No. 239/2002, along with her son, who is the 2nd plaintiff in O. S. No. 264/2002, impleading the common defendant, who is said to be the husband of the 1st plaintiff and the suit is for the relief of partition of plaint schedule properties and for their share, on the premise that the 1st plaintiff is the wife and the 2nd plaintiff is the son of the defendant.
(3.) THE Family Court it appears had taken up both the suits together and it further transpires a common issue had been framed as the defendant/petitioner in W. P. No. 10119/2006, who had been pleaded to be the husband had disputed the marriage and on such premise prayed for further relief and further had raised a preliminary objection; that the suits were not maintainable under Section 7 of the Family Courts act and this issue having been answered in favour of the plaintiffs in terms of the impugned order passed in common in the two suits, the two writ petitions are directed against the said order.