Partly allowed

Shaji Mathew P.M. v. Leena R. Abraham

Kerala HC5 Oct 2018OP (FC)/64/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court of Kerala, invoking Article 227, quashed a non-speaking order of the Family Court rejecting a prayer for passport return. The High Court restored the application and directed the Family Court to dispose of it afresh within two weeks, ensuring compliance with Order XIII Rule 9 CPC regarding document return.

What did the court decide?

Ext.P4 order quashed; I.A No. 1231/2017 restored and directed to be disposed of within two weeks complying with Relevant Provisions.

Shaji Mathew P.M. Vs Leena R. Abraham — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM

¶4

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. NARAYANA PISHARADI

¶6

FRIDAY ,THE 05TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2018 / 13TH ASWINA, 1940

¶7

OP (FC).No. 64 of 2018

¶8

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN OP 325/2015 of FAMILY COURT, THIRUVALLA

¶9

PETITIONER/S:

¶10

SHAJI MATHEW P.M. AGED 34 YEARS, S/O. P. G. MATHEWS, PUTHAKKALAYIL VEEDU, KOTTUKKAL VILLAGE, VAYANAM P.O., KOTTARAKARA.

¶11

BY ADVS. SRI.JACOB CHACKO SRI.C.A.JOJO SRI.MATHEWS JOSEPH

¶12

RESPONDENT/S:

¶13

LEENA R. ABRAHAM AGED 26 YEARS, D/O. ABRAHAM JOHN, NEDUNGATTU MALAYAIL VEEDU, PARUMALA MURI, PARUMALA P.O., KADAPARA VILLAGE, THIRUVALLA TALUK, PIN-689626. SUBSTITUTED BY THE NEW ADDRESS OF THE RESPONDENT AS IN I.A. NO.1272/2018 LEENA R ABRAHAM, D/O ABRAHAM JOHN, WORKING AT PGIMER, DR.RAM MANOHAR LOHIA HOSPITAL, NEW DELHI – 110 001.

¶14

BY ADV. SRI.VINOY VARGHESE KALLUMOOTTILL

¶15

THIS OP (FAMILY COURT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05.10.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

OP (FC).No. 64 of 2018

JUDGMENT

Abdul Rehim, J

Invoking the jurisdiction vested on this court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has instituted this original petition challenging Ext.P4 order passed by the Family Court, Thiruvalla in I.A No.1231/2017 in O.P Nos.325/2015 and 127/2016 and in M.C No. 71/2015.

¶21

The petitioner herein was the respondent in all the three cases, which were tried and disposed of together by the court below, through a common judgment. The respondent herein is the petitioner in all those cases. I.A No. 1231/2017 was filed seeking for return of the petitioner's Passport, bearing No. J7934959, on the basis that he require the same to travel abroad. Grievance of the petitioner is that, the said application was rejected by the Family Court through a totally non-speaking order, observing that the application is “rejected”.

¶22

It is submitted that the Passport of the petitioner is a document marked in evidence before the Family Court. There is a prescribed procedure for return of a document admitted in evidence, as contemplated under Order XIII Rule 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure. It is for the petitioner to comply with the requisite

¶23

OP (FC).No. 64 of 2018

¶24

¶25

formalities provided thereunder. We are of the considered opinion that the court below has to consider the application in view of the relevant provision and to pass appropriate orders thereon. We feel that, ends of justice can be achieved by directing the Family Court to do so.

¶26

Hence the above original petition is allowed to the extent of quashing Ext.P4 order passed by the Family Court in I.A No. 1231/2017, dated 13.12.2017. The said court is directed to restore I.A No. 1231/2017 on its files and to dispose of it afresh, taking note of the relevant provisions governing the issue.

¶27

Considering the urgency expressed by the petitioner, the Family Court is directed to dispose of I.A No. 1231/2017, if necessary after affording an opportunity of hearing to the respondent, at the earliest possible , at any rate, within a period of

¶28

two weeks from the date of production of a copy of this judgment.

¶29

Sd/- C.K. ABDUL REHIM, Judge

¶30

Sd/- R.NARAYANA PISHARADI, Judge

¶31

lsn

¶32

OP (FC).No. 64 of 2018

¶33

¶34

APPENDIX

¶35

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶36

EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE DIVORCE PETITION O. P. NO. 325 OF 2015 ON THE FILE OF FAMILY COURT, THIRUVALLA.

¶37

EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE PROOF AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE PETITIONER HEREIN IN O.P. 325/2015, O.P. 127/2016 AND M. C. 71/2015 OF FAMILY COURT, THIRUVALLA. EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM APPLICATION NUMBERED AS 1231/2017 FILED BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, THIRUVALLA. EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN I.A.NO. 1231/2017 DATED 13.12.2017 BY THE FAMILY COURT, THIRUVALLA.

¶38

RESPONDENT EXHIBITS : NIL

¶39

TRUE COPY

¶40

P.A TO JUDGE

¶41

LSN

Shaji Mathew P.M. v. Leena R. Abraham

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shaji Mathew P.M. v. Leena R. Abraham

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

Sumesh S., Vs State of Kerala

Unnikrishnakurup Vs Jisha T.R

Vishnu Das J. Vs the Director General of Police

Guru Deeksha Vs Abhirami Prasad

Kannan M.K. Vs Unnikrishnan Nair

P.Ansar Vs State of Kerala