Disposed

Yasodharan v. P.K. Sreekala

Kerala HC5 Dec 2018OP (FC)/567/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged the indefinite adjournment of two pending Family Court cases involving marriage dissolution and monetary claims. The High Court noted delays caused by a missing Advocate Commissioner. After receiving reports from the Family Court, the Court directed expedited disposal within four months.

What did the court decide?

Directing the Family Court, Thiruvananthapuram to dispose of O.P. Nos. 1107/2013 and 1176/2012 within four months.

Yasodharan Vs P.K. Sreekala — Matrimonial and Divorce | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM &

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.V.ANILKUMAR

¶5

WEDNESDAY,THE 05TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2018/14TH AGRAHAYANA, 1940

¶6

OP (FC).No. 567 of 2018

¶7

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN OPHMA 1107/2013 of FAMILY COURT, TRIVANDRUM

¶8

PETITIONER:

¶9

YASODHARAN

¶10

S/O KUNJU PILLAI, RESIDING AT SREEKARTHIKA, NEAR SASTHAVATTOM, THUNDATHIL P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

¶11

BY ADVS. SRI.T.P.PRADEEP SRI.S.SREEDEV

¶12

RESPONDENTS:

¶13

1 P.K. SREEKALA RESIDING AT SREEKARTHIKA, NEAR SASTHAVATTOM, THUNDATHIL P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 581

¶14

2 DR. S. MOHANDAS SABARIGIRI, TC/12/743, VARAMBISSERY ROAD, KUNNUKUZHI P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 535.

¶15

THIS OP (FAMILY COURT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05.12.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

-:2:-

O.P.(FC) No.567/2018

C.K. ABDUL REHIM

T.V. ANILKUMAR, JJ.

¶21

-----------------------------------------------------

¶22

O.P.(FC) No. 567 OF 2018 R

¶23

------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 5^th day of December, 2018

¶24

J U D G M E N T

¶25

Abdul Rehim, J.

¶26

In view of the limited relief sought for in this original

¶27

petition and in view of the order proposed through this judgment, we think it not necessary to issue notice to the respondents.

¶28

The petitioner is seeking direction to the Family

¶29

Court, Thiruvananthapuram to dispose of O.P. No.1107/2013 and 1176/2012, expeditiously. O.P. No.1107/2013 is filed by the petitioner against the 1^st respondent seeking dissolution of the marriage. O.P. No.1176/2012 is filed by the 1^st respondent herein seeking return of money, ornaments etc. It is stated that both the cases are tried together in the Family Court and the

¶30

Family Court had earlier appointed an Advocate Commissioner

¶31

O.P.(FC) No.567/2018 -:3:-

¶32

to record the evidence in the cases. But the said Advocate Commissioner had failed to execute the commission and accordingly the court had cancelled his appointment. It is stated that, thereafter the court below is adjourning the cases indefinitely. Hence, the petitioner is seeking to invoke the supervisory jurisdiction vested on this court under Section 227 of the Constitution of India to issue direction as mentioned above.

¶33

When the case came up for admission, we directed the Registry to obtain a report from the Family Court, Thiruvananthapuram regarding the present stage of the cases and with respect to the maximum time required for the disposal of the cases. In a report submitted by the Judge, Family Court, Thiruvananthapuram it is mentioned that a new Advocate Commissioner was appointed for recording the evidence. But the parties in the case submitted before that court that the original documents which were handed over to the former Advocate Commissioner has not been returned. Therefore the

¶34

O.P.(FC) No.567/2018 -:4:-

¶35

Family Court had issued notice to the earlier Advocate Commissioner. But the notice could not be served on him. It

¶36

was ordered to trace out the recent address of the earlier Advocate Commissioner from the Bar and to send him notice in the said address. It was reported that the case stands now posted to 28.11.2018.

¶37

When the case came up for consideration on 09.11.2018, we directed the Registry to call for a further report with respect to the progress of the cases before the Family Court on 28.11.2018. The learned Judge of the Family Court has sent a further report, dated 04.12.2018. It is stated that the earlier Advocate Commissioner appeared before the court below pursuant to the notice issued and submitted that, he is trying to trace out the missing documents. It was reported that

¶38

the court had instructed the new Advocate Commissioner to record the evidence by marking photocopies of the missing documents, subject to proof. The learned Judge had undertaken that if the documents could not be traced out, he will

¶39

O.P.(FC) No.567/2018 -:5:-

¶40

explore the possibility of reconstruction of the missing documents, subject to permission of this court. The court below had expressed the hope that, since the recording of evidence has already started, both the cases can be disposed of within four months.

¶41

Under the above mentioned circumstances, we take

¶42

on record the report submitted by the Judge, Family Court, Thiruvananthapuram. The above Original Petition is hereby disposed of by directing the Family Court to take all earnest efforts to dispose of O.P. Nos.1107/2013 and 1176/2012, at the earliest possible, at any rate, within a period of four months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment.

¶43

Sd/- C.K. ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE .

¶44

Sd/- T.V. ANILKUMAR, JUDGE, JUDGE .

¶45

ul/-

¶46

[True copy] P.S. to Judge.

-:6:-

O.P.(FC) No.567/2018

APPENDIX

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶51

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF O.P.(HMA)NO.1107/2013 ON THE FILES OF THE FAMILY COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶52

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF O.P. 1176/2012 ON THE FILES OF THE FAMILY COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

Yasodharan v. P.K. Sreekala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yasodharan v. P.K. Sreekala

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

Rajagopal Vs Valliyammal

Valiyammal Vs M.R.Rajagopal

Royce Vs Jiji C Johnson

Janaki Vs C.a.Gopi

Janaki Vs C.a.Gopi

Meenu, Vs Prabhu