Remanded

Prabha Rajagopalan v. P.Rajagopalan

Kerala HC15 Nov 2012Mat.Appeal/98/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This matrimonial appeal challenged an interim order allowing an application to set aside a compromise. The High Court found it improper to allow the application without enquiry, set aside the order, and remanded it for evidence within two months.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order of Family Court set aside; I.A. remanded for enquiry with appearance fixed for 30th November 2012.

Prabha Rajagopalan Vs P.Rajagopalan — Matrimonial and Divorce | Kerala HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE

¶4

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BABU MATHEW P.JOSEPH

¶6

THURSDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2012/24TH KARTHIKA 1934

¶7

Mat.Appeal.No. 98 of 2012 (A)

¶8

IA.NO.985/2011 IN OP.235/2008 of FAMILY COURT, PALAKKAD

¶9

APPELLANT/RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT:

¶10

PRABHA RAJAGOPALAN

¶11

W/O. P.RAJAGOPALAN, RAJAPRABHA, RAJAPRABHA GARDENS PIRAYIRI P.O., PALAKKAD.

¶12

BY ADVS.SRI. SAJAN VARGHEESE K.

¶13

SRI. LIJU. M.P

¶14

RESPONDENT/PETITIONER/PETITIONER:

¶15

P.RAJAGOPALAN NO.12, AB AVENUE, 72 THIRUMALASWAMY STREET, SIDDAPUDUR COIMBATORE-641 044.

¶16

RR BY ADV. SRI.O.RAMACHANDRAN NAMBIAR RR BY ADV. SRI.GEEN T.MATHEW

¶17

THIS MATRIMONIAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15-11-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & BABU MATHEW P. JOSEPH, JJ.

¶19

Mat. Appeal No.98 of 2012

¶20

Dated this the 15^th day of November, 2012

¶21

JUDGMENT

¶22

Pius C. Kuriakose, J

¶23

Under challenge in this appeal preferred under Section

¶24

19 of the Family Courts Act is the order passed by the Family Court in I.A.985/11 in OP.235/08. The above OP was in fact disposed of by the Family Court on the basis of a compromise petition submitted by the parties. I.A.985/11 was filed by the respondent for setting aside the compromise decree alleging fraud in the matter of decree. Under the impugned order, the learned Family Court has allowed the I.A. The ground which is mainly urged in this appeal is that the I.A at any rate should not have been allowed without holding an enquiry into the matter.

¶25

The respondent has not adduced any evidence regarding the fraud which was alleged. Sri.Nambiar, the

¶26

Mat. Appeal No.98 of 2012 -2-

¶27

learned counsel for the respondent submitted that it is not fully correct to say that the respondent did not adduce evidence to prove fraud. Documents were produced, though it is true that they were not marked in evidence.

¶28

Having considered the rival submissions addressed at the Bar, we feel that it was not proper on the part of the court below to have allowed I.A.985/11 straight away without even marking the documents produced by respondent. According to us the matter requires reconsideration at the hands of the learned Family Court. We therefore, set aside the impugned order and remit I.A.985/11 in OP.235/08 to the Family Court, Palakkad. The Family Court is directed to post the above I.A for enquiry. Both sides should be permitted to adduce whatever evidence they want to in the I.A. The learned Judge shall pass revised order in the I.A. after completing the enquiry early and at any rate within two months of the parties entering appearance before the Family Court pursuant to this order. Parties will enter appearance before the Family Court on 30^th November,

¶29

-3-

¶30

Mat. Appeal No.98 of 2012

¶31

Transmit the lower court records forthwith to the Family Court, Palakkad.

¶32

Sd/PIUS C. KURIAKOSE JUDGE

¶33

Sd/BABU MATHEW P. JOSEPH JUDGE

¶34

kns/-

¶35

//TRUE COPY//

¶36

P.A. TO JUDGE

Prabha Rajagopalan v. P.Rajagopalan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prabha Rajagopalan v. P.Rajagopalan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Seenathul Asma Vs Zainudeen

Smitha Vs Ajith

Pramod Panicker Vs Binu Panicker

Muraleedharan Vs Sunitha

Ameena Vs Kamaludeen

Dedhila Devadathan Vs v.Krishnan