Rafeeq v. Jaseena
Case brief
What is this about?
Allah amended an amendment petition under Article 227 allowing corrections for dates but rejecting requests to declare divorce invalid and enhance gold value.
What did the court decide?
Leave to amend clauses regarding date corrections granted; amendments requesting declaration of invalid marriage and enhanced gold value rejected.
What the court decided
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.HARILAL
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
THURSDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2019 / 7TH AGRAHAYANA, 1941
OP (FC).No.660 OF 2019
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN OP 199/2016 OF FAMILY COURT, TIRUR
PETITIONER/RESPONDENT:
1 RAFEEQ, AGED 38 YEARS S/O.KUNHABDULLA, PUTHANPEEDIKAYIL HOUSE, IRON GATE, PAYYOLI.P.O, PIN-673523, KOYILANDI TALUK
2 FATHIMA, AGED 63 YEARS,(DIED ON 26.08.2016) W/O.KUNJABDULLA.PUTHANPEEDIKAYIL HOUSE, IRON GATE,PAYYOLI(P.O),PIN-673523, KOYILANDI TALUK.
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether leave to amend pleadings to correct clerical errors regarding dates is warranted.
Whether amendments seeking declaration of invalidity of marriage in a money recovery petition are justified.
Whether enhancement of claimed value of gold ornaments in original pleadings requires leave to amend.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
JASEENA
- respondent
RAFEEQ
- respondent
FATHIMA
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court