The Kerala High Court dismissed the petitioner's original petition under Article 227 challenging the Family Court order that refused to reopen evidence and issue summons for treatment records, holding the order was not perverse or illegal.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BABU MATHEW P.JOSEPH
MONDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF OCTOBER 2012/9TH ASWINA 1934
OP (FC).No. 3153 of 2012 (R) ---------------------------OP NO.748/2010 OF THE FAMILY COURT, KOTTAYAM
PETITIONER(S):
LEKSHMI PRASAD, AGED 31 YEARS WIFE OF HAREESH G.PANICKER, SANKARA VILASAM NEAR KUMARANELLOOR DEVI TEMPLE, KUMARANELLOOR KOTTAYAM.
BY ADVS.SRI.A.BALAGOPALAN SRI.A.RAJAGOPALAN SRI.M.S.IMTHIYAZ AHAMMED SRI.M.N.MANMADAN
RESPONDENT(S):
HARISH G. PANICKER, AGED 31 YEARS SON OF C.K.GOPALAKRISHNA PANICKER VASUDEVA NILAYAMN, KALARCODE, ALAPPUZHA – 688001.
THIS OP (FAMILY COURT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01-10-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
BKA
OP (FC).No. 3153 of 2012 (R)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'(S) EXHIBITS:
| EXHIBIT P1 | TRUE COPY OP 748/ | 2010 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT HEREIN BEFORE |
|---|---|---|
| THE FAMILY COURT, | KOTTAYAM. |
RESPONDENT'(S) EXHIBITS: NIL
//TRUE COPY//
PA TO JUDGE
BKA
PIUS C. KURIAKOSE &
BABU MATHEW P. JOSEPH, JJ.
OP(FC) No: 3153 OF 2012
Dated this the 1st day of October, 2012
J U D G M E N T
Pius C. Kuriakose, J.
Under challenge in this original petition filed by the petitioner, wife of the respondent, under Article 227 of the Constitution is Ext.P7 common order passed by the Family Court, Ettumanoor on Exts.P3 and P5 IAs filed by the petitioner. Ext.P3 IA was filed for reopening of the evidence which had been already closed by the Family Court, Ettumanoor. Ext.P5 IA was filed for issuance of summons to the Administrator, Santhula Trust Hospital, Vadakara, for production of certain treatment records and copy of bills in respect of the treatment taken by the respondent from that hospital. The learned Judge of the Family Court has, in Ext.P7, dismissed both the IAs taking the view that if Ext.P5 is allowed, that will amount to permitting the petitioner to
..2..
OP(FC) No: 3153 OF 2012
adduce evidence beyond the pleadings raised by her in the case.
However, we make it clear that if the main original petition comes to be decided against the petitioner and it becomes necessary for the petitioners to prefer an appeal
OP(FC) No: 3153 OF 2012
..3..
against the judgment of the Family Court, Ettumanoor in the main original petition, this judgment of ours confirming Ext.P7 will not stand in the way of the petitioner raising a ground that Ext.P7 should have been passed.
Sd/- PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, JUDGE
Sd/- BABU MATHEW P. JOSEPH, JUDGE
bka/-
//True copy// PA to Judge
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Family Court order dismissing the petitioner's application for reopening of evidence and for issuance of summons was liable to be corrected under Article 227 of the Constitution.
Lekshmi Prasad
Harish G. Panicker
Pius C. Kuriakose
Babu Mathew P. Joseph
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
