Dismissed

S.Sreekumar v. Manu Thankappan

Kerala HC21 Feb 2017OP (FC)/591/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed an original petition filed by a petitioner father challenging the maintainability of a divorce petition filed by the respondent in the Family Court. The Court held that challenges to maintainability must be raised before the Family Court alone and quashing at this stage was not justified despite a pending appeal.

What did the court decide?

None. The original petition was dismissed.

S.Sreekumar Vs Manu Thankappan — Matrimonial and Divorce | Kerala HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.RAMAKRISHNAN

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF FEBRUARY 2017/2ND PHALGUNA, 1938

¶5

OP (FC).No. 591 of 2015 (R)

¶6

OP.NO. 912/2015 OF FAMILY COURT, KOTTAYAM ----------------

¶7

PETITIONER :

¶8

S.SREEKUMAR, AGED 44, S/O.SREEDHARAN, CHITTOOR MELETHIL HOUSE, KEERUKUZHI P.O, PANDALAM THEKKEKARA VILLAGE, ADOOR TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT.

¶9

BY ADVS.SRI.B.S.SWATHY KUMAR SRI.REMYA MURALI SMT.T.RESHMA

¶10

RESPONDENT :

¶11

MANJU THANKAPPAN, AGED 35, D/O.THANKAPPAN, KAVUMPURATHU HOUSE, MATTAKKARA P.O, AKALAKUNNAM VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM -688 564.

¶12

BY ADV. SMT.A.K.PREETHA

¶13

THIS OP (FAMILY COURT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21-02-2017,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

sts

¶15

OP (FC).No. 591 of 2015 (R)

¶16

APPENDIX

¶17

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS -------------------------------------

¶18

EXHIBIT P1. COPY OF THE OP.NO. 912/2015 OF THE FAMILY COURT, KOTTAYAM AT ETTUMANNOOR.

¶19

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: NIL --------------------------------------------

/TRUE COPY/

P.A.TO JUDGE

sts

A.M.SHAFFIQUE, J &

¶24

**K.RAMAKRISHNAN, J * * * * * * * * * * * * * *** O.P.(F.C.) No.591 of 2015

¶25

Dated this the 21^st day of February 2017

¶26

J U D G M E N T

¶27

Shaffique, J

¶28

This original petition is filed seeking for a decree of divorce. 2. The petitioner is the respondent in O.P.No.912/2015 of the Family Court, Kottayam at Ettumanoor. Another petition, O.P. (Div) No.1120/2012 has already been filed before the said Court for dissolution of marriage. Petitioner had filed an objection stating that petition for divorce is not maintainable since the grounds raised are not sufficient to dissolve the marriage. He also denied the allegations raised in the matter. Evidence was taken and the court below had passed an order for judicial separation against which an appeal was filed as Mat.Appeal No.975/2014. Thereafter, the respondent filed O.P.No.912/2015 before the Family Court, Kottayam seeking for dissolution of marriage on the ground that one year has elapsed after the date of judgment and decree. Petitioner submits that, during the pendency of the appeal, there is no necessity to consider

¶29

O.P.(F.C) No.591/2015

¶30

¶31

O.P.No.912/2015.

¶32

The petitioner apparently challenges the

¶33

maintainability of O.P.No.912/2015 which has to be raised before the Family Court alone. We do not think that this Court will be justified in quashing the original petition, at this stage of the proceedings, despite the fact that a Mat.Appeal is pending before this Court.

¶34

Under such circumstances, reserving right of the petitioner to approach the Family Court , Ettumanoor challenging the maintainability O.P.No.912/2015, this original petition is dismissed.

¶35

(sd/-)

¶36

(A.M.SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE)

¶37

(sd/-)

¶38

(K.RAMAKRISHNAN, JUDGE)

¶39

jsr

S.Sreekumar v. Manu Thankappan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Sreekumar v. Manu Thankappan

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

Joseph @ Noby Joseph Mathew Vs Mariam @ Jyothi Poikayil Jose

Biju Mathew(Varkey) Vs Prasheelda(Shiny)

Boban Joseph & Others Vs Ashly Eapen

Rajasree Vs Ramesan

Rajeswari Vs Arun

Rameshkumar Vs Bindu