Disposed

Neethu N. K. v. Jyothi

Kerala HC15 Mar 2021OP (FC)/193/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court directed the family court in Kottayam to dispose of the pending claim petition filed by the petitioner within two months after hearing all sides. The notice to respondents was dispensed with in this order. The court observed delays in the underlying family court proceedings and instructed the petitioner to serve this judgment on the family court. No substantive debate on the merits

What did the court decide?

To direct the Family Court to dispose of the claim petition within two months after hearing all sides

Neethu N. K. Vs Jyothi — Property and Title | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE

¶4

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH

¶6

MONDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 24TH PHALGUNA, 1942

¶7

OP (FC).No.193 OF 2021

¶8

AGAINST OP 483/2019 OF FAMILY COURT, KOTTAYAM AT ETTUMANOOR

¶9

PETITIONER:

¶10

NEETHU N. K. AGED 36 YEARS

¶11

W/O. RAJEEVKUMAR, KIZHAKUMURI KARA, KOKKOTHAMANGALAM VILLAGE, CHERTHALA TALUK, CHERTHALA P. O., ALAPPUZHA - 688527.

¶12

BY ADV. SRI.K.SHAJ

¶13

RESPONDENTS:

¶14

1 JYOTHI, AGED 45 YEARS D/O. VALSALA, KUNNUMPURAM HOUSE, THRIKKOTHINAM VILLAGE, CHANGANACHERRY TALUK, THRIKKODITHANAM P. O., KOTTAYAM - 686548.

¶15

2 ANILKUMAR, AGED 42 YEARS S/O SHANTHAKUMARAN NAIR, RESIDING AT ANIL NIVAS, CHANGANACHERRY TALUK, THRIKKODITHANAM P. O., KOTTAYAM - 686548.

¶16

3 VASUMATHI

¶17

AGED 75 YEARS

¶18

W/O SHANTHAKUMARAN NAIR, RESIDING AT ANIL NIVAS, CHANGANACHERRY TALUK, THRIKKODITHANAM P. O., KOTTAYAM - 686548.

¶19

THIS OP (FAMILY COURT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

O.P.(FC).No.193/2021

JUDGMENT

Dated this the 15^th day of March 2021

¶24

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, J

¶25

The petitioner herein is the claim petitioner before the Family Court, Kottayam at Ettumanoor in O.P.No.483/2019. The Family Court ordered attachment of the property upon which the petitioner has raised a claim. It appears that the petitioner has moved the Family Court as early as on 4.6.2019. On account of the delay in finalizing the proceedings, the petitioner has approached this Court.

¶26

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that the Family Court can be directed to dispose of the claim petition filed by the petitioner, within a period of two months, after hearing all sides. Directed accordingly. In the nature of the order passed above, notice to the respondents is dispensed with. The petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment before the Family Court. A copy of the judgment shall also be served to the counsel appearing for the respondents before the Family Court.

¶27

With the above observations, this O.P.(FC) is disposed of.

¶28

Sd/-

¶29

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, JUDGE

¶30

True copy P.A to Judge

¶31

DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, JUDGE

O.P.(FC).No.193/2021

APPENDIX

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶37

EXHIBIT P1	THE TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED DATED 29.04.2019 VIDE NO.833/2019 OF THENGANA SUB REGISTRAR OFFICE.
EXHIBIT P2	THE TRUE COPY OF I.A.NO.1130/2019 FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN OP NO.483/2019 BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, KOTTAYAM AT ETTUMANOOR.
EXHIBIT P3	THE TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 12.02.2020 IN W.P.9C) NO.19729/2019 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.
EXHIBIT P4	THE TRUE COPY OF TAX RECEIPT DATED 08.06.2020 BEARING NO.KL05011004347/2020 ISSUED BY VILLAGE FIELD ASSISTANT, THRIKKODITHANAM TO THE PETITIONER.

Neethu N. K. v. Jyothi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Neethu N. K. v. Jyothi

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

Nicholas P.J Vs Jaison V.P

Moydeen Vs Jasheera

Devika M., Vs Shibin Prakash

Prameela Vs Vijayakumar

Manoj Kumar Vs Prajitha

Dr Mary P.L Vs Vincent