Matrimonial appeal challenging an order directing recovery of amounts against the first respondent. The court noted the matter was settled by payment to the appellant and dismissed the appeal as settled without passing a detailed order.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE &
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.SOMARAJAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF JULY 2018 / 3RD SRAVANA, 1940
Mat.Appeal.No. 143 of 2011
-------------------------
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN OP 818/2008 of FAMILY COURT, THIRUVALLA DATED 16.10.2009
----------------
APPELLANT/PETITIONER :
PUSHPA LATHA, AGED 36 YEARS, D/O.RAMAKRISHNAN, MEPPURATHU HOUSE, RAMACKALMEDU, KARUNAPURAM VILLAGE, UDUMPACHOLA TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.SRI.V.SETHUNATH
SRI.PRAKASH KESAVAN
RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENT:
1. SURESH KUMAR, AGED 38 YEARS, S/O.RAGHAVAN, AREEKKATHARAYIL VEEDU, KANJEETTUKARA MURI, P.O.AIYROOR VILLAGE, RANNI TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DIST., PIN 689 616.
2. BHAVANIAMMA, AGED 63 YEARS, W/O.LATE RAGHAVAN, AREEKKATHARAYIL VEEDU, KANJEETTUKARA MURI, P.O.AIYROOR VILLAGE, RANNI TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN 689 616.
R,R2 BY ADV. SRI.V.K.GANGADHARAN R,R2 BY ADV. SRI.R.GIREESH VARMA R,R2 BY ADV. SRI.P.SASIDHARAN
THIS MATRIMONIAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25-07-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
AMV
A.M.SHAFFIQUE
&
P.SOMARAJAN, JJ.
.....................................
MAT Appeal No. 143 of 2011
.......................................
Dated this the 25th day of July, 2018
JUDGMENT
SHAFFIQUE, J
This matter had come up in the defect list, since notice could not be served on the first respondent. The learned counsel for the second respondent submits that the entire matter has been settled by payment to the appellant. The appeal has been filed challenging an order passed by the Family Court directing recovery of amounts only against the first respondent. In so far as the entire decree amount had been paid, the matter stands settled. We take on record the above submission and the Mat appeal is dismissed as settled.
sd/-
A.M.SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE
sd/-
P.SOMARAJAN, JUDGE
AMV/25/07/2018
PUSHPA LATHA
SURESH KUMAR
BHAVANIAMMA
A.M.SHAFFIQUE
P.SOMARAJAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
