Abu Haji v. Kadeeja
Case brief
What is this about?
The court dismissed a petition for condonation of delay and rejected the main matrimonial appeal due to non-compliance with prior conditions and expiration of the limitation period.
What did the court decide?
Petition for condonation of delay dismissed; Matrimonial Appeal No. 115/09 rejected as barred by limitation.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI WEDNESDAY, THE 14TH OCTOBER 2009 / 22ND ASWINA 1931 Mat.Appeal.No. 115 of 2009() ---------------------------OP.142/2007 of FAMILY COURT, MALAPPURAM ....................
APPELLANT/RESPONDENT IN O.P : ---------------
ABU HAJI, S/O. NEENA MUHAMMED, AGED 50, POTHALAKKAL HOUSE, PANAM PADI, OTHALUR, AMSOM KOKKUR DESOM,P.O.KOKKUR, PONNANI TALUK, MALAPPURAM DIST.
BY ADV. SRI.K.T.SHYAMKUMAR SRI.HARISH R. MENON
RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS IN O.P: ---------------
- KADEEJA, D/O. MUHAMMED, AGED 40, THEVARUPARAMBIL HOUSE, PANAM PADI, OTHALUR AMSOM KOKKUR DESOM, P.O. KOKKUR, PONNANI TALUK, MALAPPURAM DIST.
- IBRAHIM KUTTY, S/O. ABU HAJI AGED 18, THEVARUPARAMBIL HOUSE, PANAM PADI, OTHALUR AMSOM KOKKUR DESOM, P.O. KOKKUR, PONNANI TALUK, MALAPPURAM DIST.
ADV. SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU FOR R2 SRI.P.VENUGOPAL (1086/92) FOR R2
THIS MATRIMONIAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the prayer for condonation of delay in filing the matrimonial appeal deserves to be accepted given the non-compliance of conditions?
Whether the matrimonial appeal shall stand rejected as barred by limitation?
Parties & counsel
- appellant
Abu Haji
- respondent
Kadeeja
- respondent
Ibrahim Kutty
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court