Disposed

Leena Thomas v. Liya Thomas

Kerala HC2 Nov 2012OP (FC)/3576/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala, on a writ petition challenging the delay in disposal of a claim petition regarding property between sisters, directed the Family Court, Kottarakkara, to expedite proceedings and consider a filed compromise.

What did the court decide?

Directions to the Family Court, Kottarakkara to expedite and conclude the pending application within a week and consider advancement requests favourably.

Leena Thomas Vs Liya Thomas — 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

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF NOVEMBER 2012/11TH KARTHIKA 1934 OP (FC).No. 3576 of 2012 (R) ---------------------------(IA.NO.106/2012 IN OP.63/2012 OF FAMILY COURT, KOTTARAKKARA)

¶5

PETITIONER/CLAIMANT: --------------------

¶6

LEENA THOMAS, AGED 32 YEARS DAUGHTER OF THOMAS JOHN, VETTIMOOTTILCHALIL VEEDU KURAVANTHERI, MOONGODU MURI, ALAYAMON VILLAGE PATHANAPURAM TALUK, PIN-691324.

¶7

BY ADVS.SRI.P.B.SAHASRANAMAN

¶8

SRI.T.S.HARIKUMAR SRI.K.JAGADEESH

¶9

RESPONDENTS/ PETITONER AND RESPONDENT:

¶10

1. LIYA THOMAS

¶11

DAUGHTER OF THOMAS JOHN, VETTIMOOTTILCHALIL

¶12

KURAVANTHERI, ALAYAMON VILLAGE, PATHANAPURAM TALUK RESIDING AT CHARUVILA PUTHEN VEEDU, VILAKKUPARA YEROOR-691312.

¶13

2. THOMAS JOHN

¶14

SON OF JOHN, VETTIMOOTTILCHALIL, KURAVANTHERI

¶15

MOONGODU MURI, ALAYAMON VILLAGE, PATHANAPURAM TALUK PIN-691324.

¶16

THIS OP (FAMILY COURT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02-11-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

OP (FC).No. 3576 of 2012 (R)

¶18

APPENDIX

¶19

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶20

EXT.P1:TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE CLAIM PETITION FILED BY THE IST RESPONDENT AGAINST THE 2ND RESPONDENT BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, KOTTARAKKAR,A DTD 17/1/2012

¶21

EXT.P2:TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE ORDER IN IA NO 106 OF 2012 IN OPNO 63/2012 OF THE FAMILY COURT, KOTTARAKKARA, DTD 17TH JANUARY-2012

¶22

EXT.P3:TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE COMPROMISE PETITION FILED BY THE IST RESPONDENT ,DTD NIL, FILED ON 12/10/2012 BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, KOTTARAKKARA, IN OP 63 OF 2012

¶23

EXT.P4:TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE B-DIARY IN OP NO 63/2012 OF THE FAMILY COURT, KOTTARAKKARA, DTD NIL

¶24

EXT.P5:TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER FOR VACATING THE ORDER OF ATTACHMENT BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, KOTTARAKKARA, DTD AUGUST, 2012

¶25

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL

// TRUE COPY//

PA TO JUDGE

Scl.

PIUS C. KURIAKOSE &

¶30

BABU MATHEW P. JOSEPH, JJ. -----------------------------------------OP(FC) No. 3576 OF 2012

¶31

Dated this the 2^nd day of November, 2012

¶32

J U D G M E N T

¶33

Pius C. Kuriakose, J.

¶34

This original petition has been instituted by a claim petitioner in OP No:63/2012 (IA No:106/2012) seeking a direction for early disposal of the above claim petition by the Family Court, Kottarakkara.

¶35

On considering this original petition for admission, we directed the Registrar (Judicial) to get in touch with the Presiding Officer of the Family Court, Kottarakkara, and find out from him as to when at the earliest the claim petition can be disposed of.

¶36

According to the learned counsel Sri.T.S.Harikumar, the issue is actually settled between the parties and compromise has been filed also. The learned Judge of the Family Court, Kottarakkara, without noticing

¶37

OP(FC) No. 3576 OF 2012

¶38

..2..

¶39

the compromise, has unnecessarily posted IA No:1462/2012, the claim petition.

¶40

The report submitted to this Court by the Registrar (Judicial), after contacting the learned Judge of

¶41

the Family Court, Kottarakkara, is to the following effect.

¶42

“As directed, contacted the Judge, Family Court, Kottarakkara. The learned Judge, after verification, informed that OP No.63/2012 was filed on 17.01.2012 and on that very date a conditional order of attachment was passed along with the urgent notice to furnish security for ` 50 lakhs. The respondent has filed counter affidavit in the OP.

¶43

IA No.106/12 is for injunction. After passing the order of interim injunction, that IA was posted to 24.1.2012 for return of notice and thereafter adjourned to 5.3.2012 for filing counter affidavit. No counter affidavit has been filed separately in the IA. But counter affidavit has been filed in the OP. Advocate Commissioner was appointed to record evidence by order dated 18.04.2012. The learned Judge further informed that if the Hon'ble High Court is inclined to issue such a direction, the matter can be disposed of within three months.

¶44

The learned Judge, however, informed that he is on transfer and the trial will have to be conducted by his successor.”

¶45

Accordingly, in view of the above report, we dispose of

¶46

this original petition this stage itself issuing the following directions:

¶47

1.The Presiding Officer of the Family Court, Kottarakkara,

¶48

is directed to take up IA No.1462/12 in OP No.63/12 at

¶49

OP(FC) No. 3576 OF 2012

¶50

..3..

¶51

the earliest (preferably on the day to which it stands presently posted) and to pass orders on the same in accordance with law without undue delay. At any rate orders should be passed within a week of the matter being taken up.

¶52

2.If an application is filed by the petitioner for advancement of the hearing of the IA, the above application should be favourably considered by the learned Judge of the Family Court, Kottarakkara.

¶53

PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, JUDGE

¶54

BABU MATHEW P. JOSEPH, JUDGE

¶55

bka/-

Leena Thomas v. Liya Thomas

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Leena Thomas v. Liya Thomas

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

C.J. Abraham Vs Litty Mary Mathan

Venkat Raj Vs Preetha

Soumya Vs Muhamed Noufal

Sathyanadhan Vs Praseetha Kumari

Sudhani, D/O.Kochuvava Vs Shalini M.P.

Sreekala Vs Rajesh