Quashed

C.S.Babu v. T.v.Nisha

Kerala HC16 Nov 2012OP (FC)/3573/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Kerala High Court quashed an Order in Original Petition (FC) No.3573 of 2012 dismissing an application seeking leave to appear via Power of Attorney. Holding that personal appearance is not justified on every date, the High Court directed the Family Court to permit representation unless absolutely necessary for procedures like counseling.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order dismissing the application was set aside, and the matter remanded to the Family Court for fresh orders relaxing the personal appearance requirement.

C.S.Babu Vs T.v.Nisha — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Kerala HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BABU MATHEW P.JOSEPH FRIDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2012/25TH KARTHIKA 1934

¶4

OP (FC).No. 3573 of 2012 (R) ---------------------------OP.1649/2011 of FAMILY COURT,THRISSUR

¶5

PETITIONER(S)/RESPONDENT:

¶6

C.S.BABU,, S/O KUMARAN, CHERUKUNNATH HOUSE, ERUMPETTY P.O KUTTANCHERY DESOM, NELLUVAI VILLAGE THALAPPILLY TALUK, 680584 THRISSUR DISTRICT REPRESENTED BY THE POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER PADMAVATHY SUKUMARAN W/O SUKUMARAN, CHERUKUNNATH HOUSE, ERUMAPETTY P.O KUTTANCHERY DESOM, NELLUVAI VILLAGE THALLAPPILLY TALUK, 680584 THRISSUR DISTRICT BY ADVS.SRI.P.SANTHOSH (PODUVAL) SMT.R.RAJITHA

¶7

RESPONDENT(S)/PETITIONER: ------------------------T.V.NISHA D/O VIJAYAN, THEKKOOTT HOUSE, MANALITHARA DESOM THEKKUMKARA VILLAG,E THALAPPILLY TALUK THRISSUR DISTRICT 680001

¶8

THIS OP (FAMILY COURT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16-112012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶9

O.P.(FC) 3573/2012

¶10

APPENDIX

¶11

PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS

¶12

EXT. P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION IN O.P 1649/2011 BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, THRISSUR

¶13

EXT. P2 TRUE COPY OF THE POWER OF ATTORNEY EXECUTED BY THE PETITIONER IN FAVOUR OF HIS MOTHER

¶14

EXT. P3 TRUE COPY OF THE I.A 7479/2011 IN O.P 1649/2011 BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT THRISSUR

¶15

EXT. P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 05-06-12 IN I.A 7479/2011 IN O.P 1649/2011 BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, THRISSUR

¶16

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS NIL

¶17

/TRUE COPY/

¶18

P.A. TO JUDGE.

¶19

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

¶20

O.P.(FC) . NO.3573 OF 2012

¶21

Dated this the 16^th day of November, 2012

¶22

JUDGMENT

¶23

Pius C.Kuriakose,J

¶24

Even though the respondent has been served with notice, there is no appearance for the respondent.

¶25

2.In this original petition under Article 227, Ext.P4 order passed by the Family Court, Thrissur is under challenge. By Ext.P4, the Family Court dismissed I.A. No.7479/2011 in which

¶26

the petitioner prays that he, the respondent in O.P. No.1649/2011, be permitted to appear through his power of attorney holder his own mother. The Family Court by the impugned order rejected that I.A. and has ordered that the petitioner shall appear.

¶27

Sri.Santhosh P.Poduval learned counsel for the petitioner submits that insistence of personal appearance of the petitioner

¶28

on every posting date is not justified. The petitioner is presently in a Gulf country. The petitioner will appear for

¶29

O.P.(FC) No. 2773 /2012 2

¶30

essential procedures such as counseling, etc. on the basis of orders in that regard passed by the court. On days when the personal appearance of the petitioner is not absolutely necessary, the petitioner should be permitted to appear through his power of attorney holder.

¶31

4.We feel that there is some force in the submissions of Sri.Santhosh P. Poduval. We, therefore, set aside the impugned order and remit I.A. No.7479/2011 to the Family Court, Thrissur. The learned Judge is directed to pass fresh orders in that I.A ., under which the personal appearance of the petitioner before that court will be insisted only when the same is absolutely necessary to undergo procedures such as counseling, etc.

¶32

Sd/-

¶33

PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE

¶34

Sd/-

¶35

BABU MATHEW P.JOSEPH, JUDGE.

¶36

Dpk

¶37

/True copy/ P.A to Judge.

¶38

O.P.(FC) No. 2773 /2012 3

C.S.Babu v. T.v.Nisha

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

C.S.Babu v. T.v.Nisha

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

Prabha Rajagopalan Vs P.Rajagopalan

Muraleedharan Vs Sunitha

Ameena Vs Kamaludeen

Binitha Harindran Vs Harindran

Philipose Alexander Vs Authorised Officer

Soniyamol Jomon Vs State of Kerala