Disposed

Gopalakrishnan v. G. Aswathy

Kerala HC14 Sept 2015Crl.MC/6121/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court in Crl.MC.No. 6121 of 2015 dismissed the petition challenging an interim order from the Additional Sessions Court. The petitioner sought cancellation or modification of a conditional stay directing him to pay interim maintenance of Rs. 1,500 monthly. The court held it inappropriate to usurp the appellate judge's powers and found no need to interfere as the payment caused no hardship

What did the court decide?

The petition was disposed of without admitting the original petition to files. No modification or cancellation of the impugned interim order was granted.

Gopalakrishnan Vs G. Aswathy — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.UBAID

¶4

MONDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2015/23RD BHADRA, 1937

¶5

Crl.MC.No. 6121 of 2015

¶6

IN MC 114/2014 OF THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-I, CHENGANNUR

¶7

AGAINST THE INTERIM ORDER DATED 22.7.2015 IN CRL.M.P NO.417/2015 IN CRL.A NO.183/2015 OF THE ADDITIONAL SESSION'S COURT I, MAVELIKKARA

¶8

PETITIONER/PETITIONER/APPELLANT:

¶9

GOPALAKRISHNAN, AGED 58 YEARS, S/O.LATE THIRUVANKUTTY, “JIJI BHAVANAM”, VANUVATHUKKARA, THIRUVANDOOR VILLAGE, ERAMALIKKARA P.O, CHENGANNUR TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.N.K.MOHANLAL

¶11

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:

¶12

1. G.ASWATHY, AGED 29 YEARS, D/O.RETHNAMMA, PALANIKUNNIL HOUSE, NEERVILAKAM, KIDANGANNUR VILLAGE, KOZHENCHERRY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA-682015.

¶13

2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-31.

¶14

R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.SHEEBA M.T

¶15

THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14-09-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

Crl.MC.No. 6121 of 2015 -----------------------

¶17

APPENDIX

¶18

PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES:

¶19

ANNEXURE 1: COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 22-7-2015 IN CRA.NO.183/015 BY THE ADDITIONAL SESSIONS COURT-I, MAVELIKKARA.

¶20

ANNEXURE 2 : COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 10-2-2012 IN MC.15/2012 BY THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT, CHENGANNUR.

¶21

RESPONDENTS' ANNEXURES:

NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.A TO JUDGE

P.UBAID, J. --------------------------------------Crl.M.C No.6121 of 2015 ---------------------------------------

¶27

Dated this the 14^th day of September, 2015

¶28

O R D E R

¶29

The petitioner herein is the respondent in M.C No.114/2014 of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court I, Chengannur. It is a proceeding brought under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act (DV Act). The learned Magistrate passed an interim order in the said proceeding, granting maintenance to the claimant. The said order was challenged in appeal under Section 29 of the DV Act before the learned Additional Sessions Judge I, Mavelikkara. The learned Additional Sessions Judge granted stay of the proceedings in the trial court, on condition. As a condition for stay, the petitioner herein is directed to make payment of interim maintenance at the rate of 1,500/- per month. The said₹ conditional order of stay dated 22.7.2015 in Crl.M.P No.417/2015 is under challenge.

¶30

On hearing the learned counsel and on a perusal of the materials, including the impugned order I find that if the

¶31

Crl.M.C No.6121 of 2015 2

¶32

petitioner wants or seeks cancellation of the order or modification of the order, he will have to approach the learned appellate judge. I feel it inappropriate to usurp into the powers of the learned appellate judge and modify the conditional stay order granted in appeal. Even otherwise, interference in the impugned order is felt not necessary, because I do not think that a direction to pay interim maintenance at the rate of 1,500/- per₹ month will cause any hardship to the petitioner.

¶33

With the above observations this Crl.M.C is disposed of without being admitted to files.

¶34

P.UBAID JUDGE

¶35

Gopalakrishnan v. G. Aswathy

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gopalakrishnan v. G. Aswathy

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

K.C. Pramod Das Vs State of Kerala

Manaf Vs Safiya

Nissam K.S Vs Jasmin

Muhammed Rafi Vs State of Kerala

V.K.Ummerkutty Vs State of Kerala

T.N.Ashokan Vs State of Kerala