Disposed

N Pramod Kumar v. Shahina

Kerala HC27 Nov 2012OP (FC)/4017/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court, in an Article 227 petition challenging Family Court proceedings under Section 125 Cr.P.C., directed the Family Court to refer the pending case to the District Mediation Centre. The trial is to commence only if mediation fails, dismissing prayers for quashing.

What did the court decide?

Directed Family Court to refer O.P.278/11 to District Mediation Centre; trial to commence only if mediation fails.

N Pramod Kumar Vs Shahina — Service and Employment | 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

TUESDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2012/6TH AGRAHAYANA 1934

¶7

OP (FC).No. 4017 of 2012 (R)

¶8

OP.278/2011 of FAMILY COURT, VADAKARA

¶9

PETITIONER:

¶10

N PRAMOD KUMAR, AGED 31 YEARS S/O. RAIRU KUTTY, MATHATH THAZHA KUNIYIL HOUSE VANIMEL AMSOM DESOM VALAYAM POLICE STATION LIMIT BOOMIVATHAKKAL.P.O. KOZHIKODE.

¶11

BY ADV. SRI.P.M.HABEEB

¶12

RESPONDENTS:

¶13

SHAHINA, AGED 21 YEARS

¶14

D/O. HARIDAS, KUNNUMMAL HOUSE, ONCHIYAM.P.O.

¶15

(CHOMBALA POLICE STATION LIMIT)

¶16

STATE OF KERALA

¶17

REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM.

¶18

R1 BY ADV. SRI.SUNIL NAIR (PALAKKAD)

¶19

THIS OP (FAMILY COURT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27-11-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

OP (FC).No. 4017 of 2012 (R)

¶21

APPENDIX

¶22

PETITIONER'S EXTS

¶23

EXT.A :- PHOTOCOPY OF THE OP NO.278/11 BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, VADAKARA.

¶24

EXT.B:- PHOTOCOPY OF MC.90/11 FILED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, VADAKARA UNDER SECTION 125 CR. P.C

¶25

EXT.C:- PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER IN CMP 6895/11 IN CRL. M.C.271/11 BY THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, VADAKARA DT.20/06/12

¶26

EXT.D:- PHOTOCOPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 20/06/09.

¶27

EXT.E:- PHOTOCOPY OF THE INTERIM STAY GRANTED BY THIS HON. COURT IN CRL. M.C. 3276/12.

¶28

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

¶29

O. P. (FC) No.4017 of 2012

¶30

Dated this the 27^th day of November, 2012

¶31

JUDGMENT

¶32

Pius C. Kuriakose, J

¶33

This Original Petition under Article 227 is instituted by the petitioner who is the respondent in O.P.278/11 pending before the Family Court, Vadakara for quashment of the entire proceedings in O.P.278/11 and to pass a declaration that O.P.278/11 pending before the Family Court is an absolute process of law.

¶34

As directed by us copy of this Original Petition was given to Advocate Sri.P.Sunil Nair. According to Sri.P.M.Habeeb, the learned counsel for the petitioner if the case is referred to the High Court Mediation Centre, there is a likelihood of not only O.P.278/11 but many other matters which are pending between the parties being settled in mediation.

¶35

O. P. (FC) No.4017 of 2012

¶36

-2-

¶37

On behalf of Sri.Sunil Nair it is submitted that the respondent may not stand in the way of the cases being referred to mediation. We learn that District Mediation Centre at Kozhikode has become functional as accreditation has been given to the mediators there by the MCPC. We are sure that the mediators in the District Mediation Centre, Kozhikode/Vadakara are persons with requisite skills and if the parties have the will for settlement those mediators will be able to bring forth settlement.

¶38

As for the prayers in the Original Petition, we do not find any warrant for granting those prayers. We are told that O.P.278/11 stood posted for evidence. But obviously on the basis of the submission that this Court is being moved, the trial was adjourned to another day. Under the above circumstances we dispose of the OP directing the Family Court, Vadakara to refer OP.278/11 to the District Mediation Centre before actual trial of the case is taken up. In other words the OP should be referred to the Mediation Centre and trial should be commenced only if the mediation becomes

¶39

O. P. (FC) No.4017 of 2012

¶40

-3-

¶41

unsuccessful.

¶42

5. Issue copy today itself.

¶43

Sd/PIUS C. KURIAKOSE

¶44

JUDGE

¶45

Sd/BABU MATHEW P. JOSEPH JUDGE

¶46

kns/-

¶47

//TRUE COPY//

¶48

P.A. TO JUDGE

N Pramod Kumar v. Shahina

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

N Pramod Kumar v. Shahina

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

Abdulla Vs the Superintendent of Police, Cannanore

Vasanthakumaran Vs the Commissioner of Excise

K.K.Ibrahim Kutty Vs Commissioner of Police, Kozhikode

Siraj.M.a. Vs C.T.K.Ameera

Reena Viju Vs Viju Thomas

Shaiju M. Vs the State of Kerala