Dismissed

Santhosh.C.S v. Lisha.P.K

Kerala HC24 Sept 2019RPFC/268/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A respondent's counsel submitted that revision proceedings are not the appropriate remedy to challenge an interim Family Court order. Leave was granted to withdraw the revision petition, subject to liberty to invoke the proper remedy under Article 226 CrPC or Constitution, with the impugned order returned to counsel.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted liberty to withdraw the Revision Petition with liberty to invoke proper remedies, specifically Article 226 of the Constitution or Section 482 of Cr.P.C.

Santhosh.C.S Vs Lisha.P.K — Matrimonial and Divorce | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2019 / 2ND ASWINA, 1941

¶5

RPFC.No.268 OF 2019

¶6

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN MC 271/2018 OF FAMILY COURT,ERNAKULAM

¶7

REVISION PETITIONER/S:

¶8

SANTHOSH.C.S, AGED 52 YEARS S/O. SATHYANATHAN, CHAKKANALIL HOUSE, MALA (P.O), VADAMA, THRISSUR WORKING AS MANAGER, KSFE, NEDUMKANDAM BRANCH, NEDUMKANDAM, IDUKKI DISTRICT.

¶9

BY ADVS. SRI.NIDHI BALACHANDRAN SRI.SABU GEORGE SRI.P.D.PAULY

¶10

RESPONDENT/S:

¶11

1 LISHA.P.K, AGED 42 YEARS, D/O. KUTTAPPAN, CHAKKANALIL HOUSE, EAST KODUNGALLOOR, UC COLLEGE (P.O), ALUVA-683 102

¶12

2 APARNA C.S,(NOW MAJOR-BORN ON 9.9.2000), CHAKKANALIL HOUSE, EAST KODUNGALLOOR, UC COLLEGE (P.O), ALUVA-683 102

¶13

3 UDAYASANKAR C.S, MINOR AGED 17 YEARS, REPRESENTED BY HER MOTHER AND GUARDIAN, LISHA P.K, D/O. KUTTAPPAN, AGED 42 YEARS, CHAKKANALIL HOUSE, EAST KODUNGALLOOR, UC COLLEGE (P.O), ALUVA, 683 102.

¶14

THIS REV.PETITION(FAMILY COURT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24.09.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

RPFC.No.268 OF 2019

¶16

::2::

¶17

ALEXANDER THOMAS, J .

¶18

R.P(FC).No.268 Of 2019

¶19

Dated this the 24^th day of September, 2019.

¶20

O R D E R

¶21

Sri.Nidhi Balachandran, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit on the basis of instructions that the proper remedy to challenge the interim order passed by the Family Court is not revisional proceedings but an appropriate application either under Article 227 of the Constitution of India or under Sec.482 of the Cr.P.C and therefore leave may be granted to the petitioner to withdraw the R.P(FC) with liberty to invoke the proper remedy. Further, this Court may direct the Registry to return back the certified copy of the impugned order to the counsel for the revision petitioner.

¶22

Liberty is accorded to the petitioner to work out his remedies in the manner known to law. Further it is ordered that the Registry will return back certified copy of the impugned order to the counsel for the revision petitioner, if a request in that

¶23

::3::

¶24

RPFC.No.268 OF 2019

¶25

regard is made by him. However, Registry will ensure that a photocopy of the same is kept in the case file for the purpose

¶26

of maintenance of records.

¶27

With the said liberty, the Revision Petition will stand

¶28

dismissed as withdrawn.

¶29

Sd/ALEXANDER THOMAS, Judge.

¶30

bkn/-

¶31

::4::

¶32

RPFC.No.268 OF 2019

¶33

APPENDIX

¶34

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶35

ANNEXURE A1 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FILED BY THE RESPONDENTS IN MC 271/18 ON THE FILE OF THE FAMILY COURT, ERNAKULAM.

¶36

ANNEXURE A2 TRUE COPY OF THE MP NO. 158/19 IN MC 271/18 FILED BY THE RESPONDENTS.

¶37

ANNEXURE A3 TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL RECORDS EVIDENCING THE TREATMENT UNDERWENT BY THE PETITIONER IN CARITAS HOSPITAL, KOTTAYAM.

¶38

ANNEXURE A4 TRUE COPY OF THE RECORDS DATED 3.4.19 SHOWING THAT PETITIONER UNDERWENT TREATMENT IN DEPARTMENT OF NON INVASIVE CARDIOLOGY IN IRUDHAYAMS HOSPITAL NAGERCOIL.

¶39

ANNEXURE A5 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE DOCTOR DATED 7.5.19 ALONG WITH REPORT OF THE MEDICAL REVIEW CONDUCTED ON THE PETITIONER.

¶40

ANNEXURE A6 TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 22.5.2019 BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, ERNAKULAM.

Santhosh.C.S v. Lisha.P.K

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santhosh.C.S v. Lisha.P.K

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

P.Joshi, Vs Jayasree

Bajida, Vs the State of Kerala

Meera Vs Land Tribunal

Unnichandran, Vs K.Mini

Rajendran Vs Dr.v.Venu

Vinod.v. Vs the State of Kerala