Disposed

Mathew Martin v. Seena a.

Kerala HC17 Nov 2012OP (FC)/3817/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought early disposal of pending applications in an original petition filed before the Family Court, Kollam. The High Court, relying on a report from the Registrar, directed the Family Court to dispose of the main divorce petition (O.P. No. 304/2011) and connected matters independently or jointly by 31/03/2013. This direction is conditional upon the cooperation of the petitioner and res

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Presiding Officer, Family Court, Kollam to dispose of O.P. No. 304/2011 and connected matters by 31/03/2013, subject to party cooperation.

Mathew Martin Vs Seena a. — 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

¶4

¶5

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

¶6

SATURDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2012/26TH KARTHIKA 1934

¶7

OP (FC).No. 3817 of 2012 (R) ---------------------------OPDIV.304/2011 of FAMILY COURT,KOLLA

¶8

PETITIONER(S):

¶9

MATHEW MARTIN, AGED 35 YEARS S/O.MARTIN, MERIN DALE, NEENDAKARA KOLLAM 691582.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.R.V.SREEJITH

¶11

RESPONDENT(S):

¶12

SEENA A. D/O.ALFRED, CHARUVILA VEEDU, KANJIRACODE KUNDARA, KOLLAM.

¶13

THIS OP (FAMILY COURT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17-112012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

O.P.(FC) 3817/2012

¶15

PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS

¶16

EXHIBIT-P1: TRUE COPY OF THE O.P.(DIV.) 304/2011 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE HON'BLE FAMILY COURT, KOLLAM.

¶17

EXHIBIT-P2: TRUE COPY OF THE COUNTER CLAIM FILED BY THE RESPONDENT UNDER SECTION 15 OF THE DIVORCE ACT.

¶18

EXHIBIT-P3: TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM I.A.1726/2012 IN O.P.304/2011 FILED BY THE PETITIONER.

¶19

EXHIBIT-P4: TRUE COPY OF THE I.A.NO.1726/2012 IN O.P.304/2011 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT.

¶20

EXHIBIT-P5: TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER TO HEAR EXT.P3 EXPEDITIOUSLY.

¶21

EXHIBIT-P6: TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY THE RESPONDENT.

¶22

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS NIL

¶23

P.A. TO JUDGE.

¶24

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

¶25

O.P.(FC) . NO. 3817 OF 2012

¶26

Dated this the 17^th day of November, 2012

¶27

JUDGMENT

¶28

Pius C.Kuriakose,J

¶29

The prayer in this original petition is that Exts.P3 and

¶30

P5 presently pending before the Family Court, Kollam, be directed to be disposed of early.

¶31

On considering this original petition for admission, we directed the Registrar(Judicial) to contact the Presiding Officer, Family Court, Kollam and find out as to when at the earliest it will be possible for the learned Judge to dispose of Exts.P3 and P5. The Registrar contacted the Judge and has accordingly submitted a report which reads as follows;

¶32

“ As directed, contacted the Judge,

¶33

Family Court, Kollam. The learned Judge,

¶34

after verification, informed that

¶35

I.A.No.1726/12 (Ext.P3) is a claim petition

¶36

filed by the husband in O.P.304/2011 seeking

¶37

O.P.(FC) No. 3817 /2012

¶38

¶39

divorce. The wife has also filed a petition for

¶40

divorce on different grounds. Other cases including a criminal case under Section 498A

¶41

are pending. According to the learned Judge, if Ext.P3 is decided independently, that is likely to affect the rights of the parties. Unless a joint petition is filed, all the connected cases will have to be tried jointly and disposed of by a common judgment. The cases stand posted to 3/1/2013. If both the sides co-operate and such a direction is issued by this Hon'ble Court O.P. No.304/2011 and the connected cases can be disposed of before 31/3/2013.”

¶42

In view of the above report, we direct the Presiding Officer of the Family Court, Kollam to dispose of O.P.No.304/2011 and all connected matters including Ext. P3 claim petition in accordance with law at the earliest and at any rate by 31/3/2013.

¶43

The above direction is subject to the condition that the

¶44

O.P.(FC) No. 3817 /2012

¶45

¶46

petitioner and the respondent co-operate with the Family Court by complying with directions issued by the court regarding the

¶47

taking of steps.

¶48

Sd/-

¶49

PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE

¶50

Sd/-

¶51

BABU MATHEW P.JOSEPH, JUDGE.

¶52

d pk

¶53

/True copy/ P.A to Judge.

¶54

O.P.(FC) No. 3817 /2012 4

Mathew Martin v. Seena a.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mathew Martin v. Seena a.

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.S.Babu Vs T.v.Nisha

Binitha Harindran Vs Harindran

Philipose Alexander Vs Authorised Officer

Staby Vs Jiby

Skaria K.C. @ Chacko Skaria Vs Sofi Skaria

Reji Sebastian Vs Thomas @ Vinod