Allowed

Aneena Elizabeth Varghese v. Jayson Abraham

Kerala HC20 Oct 2022Mat.Appeal/8/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala disposed of multiple matrimonial appeals and revision petitions arising from a disputed marriage. After the parties settled their dispute through mediation, the court dismissed the appeals and allowed the pending joint petition for divorce by mutual consent filed under Section 10A of the Indian Divorce Act, 1869.

What did the court decide?

The matrimonial appeals and revision petitions were dismissed, and the petition for divorce by mutual consent under Section 10A of the Indian Divorce Act, 1869 was allowed in terms of the mediation se

Aneena Elizabeth Varghese Vs Jayson Abraham — Matrimonial and Divorce | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN

¶4

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.G. AJITHKUMAR

¶6

THURSDAY, THE 20^TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2022/ 28TH ASWINA, 1944

¶7

MAT.APPEAL NO. 180 OF 2020

¶8

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 23.11.2019 IN O.P.NO.99 OF 2017 OF THE FAMILY COURT, KOTTAYAM AT ETTUMANOOR

¶9

APPELLANTS/RESPONDENTS/COUNTER CLAIM PETITIONERS:

¶10

1 JAYSON ABRAHAM

¶11

AGED 33 YEARS, S/O.ABRAHAM.G, JOSH BHAVAN, THAZHAKKARA.P.O, MAVELIKKARA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN-690102, REPRESENTED BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER MARIYAMMA ABRAHAM, AGED 60, W/O.ABRAHAM G, JOSH BHAVAN, THAZHAKKARA.P.O., MAVELIKKARA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN-690102.

¶12

2 ABRAHAM G., AGED 65 YEARS, S/O.YOHANNAN, JOSH BHAVAN, THAZHAKKARA.P.O, MAVELIKKAR, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN-690102.

¶13

3 MARIYAMMA ABRAHAM, AGED 60 YEARS, W/O.ABRAHAM.G, JOSH BHAVAN, THAZHAKKARA.P.O, MAVELIKKARA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN-690102.

¶14

BY ADVS.

¶15

SIBY CHENAPPADY SMT.ANU GEORGE SRI.ANEESH JAMES

¶16

¶17

Mat.Appeal Nos.180, 9 & 8 of 2020 and R.P.(FC) Nos.112 & 124 of 2022

¶18

RESPONDENT/PETITIONER/COUNTER CLAIM RESPONDENT:

¶19

ANEENA ELIZANETH VARGHESE, AGED 25 YEARS, D/O.BIJU KANJIRAKATTU VARGHESE, RESIDING AT KANJIRAKATTU HOUSE, KARAPUZHA.P.O,THIRUVATHUCKAL, KOTTAYAM, PIN-686003.

¶20

BY ADV SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR)

¶21

THIS MATRIMONIAL APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR FINAL HEARING ON 20.10.2022, ALONG WITH Mat.Appeal.9/2020, 8/2020 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶22

¶23

Mat.Appeal Nos.180, 9 & 8 of 2020 and R.P.(FC) Nos.112 & 124 of 2022

¶24

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶25

PRESENT

¶26

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN

¶27

¶28

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.G. AJITHKUMAR THURSDAY, THE 20^TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2022/ 28TH ASWINA, 1944

¶29

MAT.APPEAL NO. 9 OF 2020

¶30

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 23.11.2019 IN O.P.NO.105 OF 2017 OF THE FAMILY COURT, KOTTAYAM AT ETTUMANOOR APPELLANT/1ST RESPONDENT:

¶31

ANEENA ELIZABETH VARGHESE, AGED 25 YEARS, D/O.BIJU KANJIRAKATTU VARGHESE, KANJIRAKATTU VARGHESE, KARAPUZHA P.O., THIRUVATHUCKAL, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT-686003. BY ADV G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR)

¶32

RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER AND 2ND RESPONDENT:

¶33

1 JAYSON ABRAHAM,

¶34

AGED 33 YEARS, S/O.ABRAHAM G., JOSH BHAVAN, THAZHAKKARA P.O., MAVELIKARA, ALAPUZHA DISTRICT-690102, REPRESENTED BY POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER MARIYAMMA ABRAHAM, JOSH BHAVAN, THAZHAKKARA P.O., MAVELIKARA, ALAPUZHA DISTRICT-690102.

¶35

2 SUDHARSAN SREEDHARAN, AGED 28 YEARS S/O.SREEDHARAN, 55A, (4/204), AMBALAPARA GRAMA PANCHAYATH, OTTAPALAM, PALAKKAD DISTRICT-679511.

¶36

¶37

Mat.Appeal Nos.180, 9 & 8 of 2020 and R.P.(FC) Nos.112 & 124 of 2022

¶38

BY ADVS.

¶39

SRI.SIBY CHENAPPADY SMT.ANU GEORGE

¶40

THIS MATRIMONIAL APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR FINAL HEARING ON 20.10.2022, ALONG WITH Mat.Appeal.180/2020 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶41

¶42

Mat.Appeal Nos.180, 9 & 8 of 2020 and R.P.(FC) Nos.112 & 124 of 2022

¶43

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶44

PRESENT

¶45

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN

¶46

¶47

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.G. AJITHKUMAR THURSDAY, THE 20^TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2022/28TH ASWINA, 1944

¶48

MAT.APPEAL NO. 8 OF 2020

¶49

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 23.11.2019 IN O.P.NO.99 OF 2017 OF THE FAMILY COURT, KOTTAYAM AT ETTUMANOOR APPELLANT/PETITIONER/COUNTER CLAIM RESPONDENT:

¶50

ANEENA ELIZABETH VARGHESE

¶51

AGED 25 YEARS, D/O.BIJU, KANJIRAKATTU VARGHESE, KANJIRAKATTU VARGHESE, KARAPUZHA P O, THIRUVATHUCKAL, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT-686003. BY ADV G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR)

¶52

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS/COUNTER CLAIM PETITIONERS:

¶53

1 JAYSON ABRAHAM

¶54

AGED 35 YEARS, S/OP. ABRAHAM G, JOSH BHAVAN, THAZHAKKARA P O, MAVELIKARA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-690102, REPRESENTED BY POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER MARIYAMMA ABRAHAM, JOSEH BHAVAN, THAZHAKKARA P O, MAVELIKARA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-690102.

¶55

2 ABRAHAM G., AGED 63 YEARS, JOSH BHAVAN, THAZHAKKARA P O, MAVELIKARA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-690102.

¶56

¶57

Mat.Appeal Nos.180, 9 & 8 of 2020 and R.P.(FC) Nos.112 & 124 of 2022

¶58

3 MARIYAMA ABRAHAM, AGED 60, W/O. ABRAHAM G, JOSH BHAVAN, THAZHAKKARA P O, MAVELIKKARA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-690102.

¶59

BY ADVS. SRI.SIBY CHENAPPADY SMT.ANU GEORGE

¶60

THIS MATRIMONIAL APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR FINAL HEARING ON 20.10.2022, ALONG WITH Mat.Appeal.180/2020 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶61

¶62

Mat.Appeal Nos.180, 9 & 8 of 2020 and R.P.(FC) Nos.112 & 124 of 2022

¶63

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶64

PRESENT

¶65

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN

¶66

¶67

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.G. AJITHKUMAR

¶68

THURSDAY, THE 20^TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2022/ 28TH ASWINA, 1944

¶69

R.P.(FC) NO. 112 OF 2022

¶70

AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 11.11.2021 IN M.C.NO.117/2016 OF THE FAMILY COURT, KOTTAYAM AT ETTUMANOOR

¶71

REVISION PETITIONER/PETITIONER:

¶72

ANEENA ELIZABETH VARGHESE

¶73

AGED 29 YEARS, KANJIRAKKATTU HOUSE, KARAPPUZHA P.O., THIRUVATHUKKAL, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT-686003.

¶74

BY ADV M.SREEKUMAR

¶75

RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT:

¶76

JAYSON ABRAHAM

¶77

AGED 36 YEARS JOSH BHAVAN, THAZHAKARA P.O., MAVELIKKARA, ALAPPUZHA-690102.

¶78

BY ADVS. ANEESH JAMES SIBY CHENAPPADY ANU GEORGE

¶79

THIS REV.PETITION(FAMILY COURT) HAVING COME UP FOR FINAL HEARING ON 20.10.2022, ALONG WITH Mat.Appeal.180/2020 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶80

¶81

Mat.Appeal Nos.180, 9 & 8 of 2020 and R.P.(FC) Nos.112 & 124 of 2022

¶82

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶83

PRESENT

¶84

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN

¶85

¶86

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.G. AJITHKUMAR THURSDAY, THE 20^TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2022/ 28TH ASWINA, 1944 R.P.(FC) NO. 124 OF 2022

¶87

AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 11.11.2021 IN M.C.NO.117/2016 OF THE FAMILY COURT, KOTTAYAM AT ETTUMANOOR REVISION PETITIONER/RESPONDENT:

¶88

JAYSON ABRAHAM

¶89

AGED 37 YEARS, JOSH BHAVAN, THAZHAKKARA P.O.,, MAVELIKKARA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER MARIYAMMA ABRAHAM, AGED 61, W/O. ABRAHAM G,, JOSH BHAVAN, THAZHAKKARA P.O., MAVELIKKARA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN – 690102.

¶90

BY ADVS. SIBY CHENAPPADY ANEESH JAMES ANU GEORGE

¶91

RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT:

¶92

ANEENA ELIZABETH VARGHESE AGED 32 YEARS KANJIRAKATTU HOUSE, KARAPUZHA P.O., THIRUVATHUCKAL, KOTTAYAM, PIN – 686003. BY ADV M.SREEKUMAR M

¶93

¶94

Mat.Appeal Nos.180, 9 & 8 of 2020 and R.P.(FC) Nos.112 & 124 of 2022

¶95

THIS REV.PETITION(FAMILY COURT) HAVING COME UP FOR FINAL HEARING ON 20.10.2022, ALONG WITH Mat.Appeal.180/2020 AND CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶96

¶97

Mat.Appeal Nos.180, 9 & 8 of 2020 and R.P.(FC) Nos.112 & 124 of 2022

¶98

JUDGMENT/ORDER

¶99

Anil K. Narendran, J.

¶100

Since common issues are raised, these appeals and revision petitions are heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment/order.

¶101

The marriage between the 1^st appellant-husband and the respondent-wife in Mat.Appeal No.180 of 2020 was solemnized on 19.04.2015. The respondent-wife filed O.P.No.99 of 2017 before the Family Court, Kottayam at Ettumanoor, seeking a decree for return of money and gold ornaments. In that original petition, the husband filed a counter claim. The Family Court tried that matter along with connected cases. By a common judgment dated 23.11.2019, the Family Court decreed O.P.No.99 of 2017 filed by the respondent-wife and the counter claim filed by the 1^st respondent-husband in part. Challenging the said judgment and decree of the Family Court, to the extent of decreeing O.P.No.99 of 2017 in part, the appellant-husband and his parents have filed Mat.Appeal No.180 of 2020. Mat.Appeal

¶102

¶103

Mat.Appeal Nos.180, 9 & 8 of 2020 and R.P.(FC) Nos.112 & 124 of 2022

¶104

No.8 of 2020 is filed by the wife challenging the common judgment dated 23.11.2019 of the Family Court, whereby O.P.No.99 of 2017 filed by her was allowed only in part. Mat.Appeal No.9 of 2020 is filed by the wife challenging the common judgment dated 23.11.2019 in O.P.(Divorce) No.105 of 2017, filed by the husband. By the impugned judgment, the Family Court granted a decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty. R.P.(FC) No.112 of 2022 and R.P.(FC) No.124 of 2022 were filed by the wife and husband respectively challenging the order dated 11.11.2021 in M.C.No.117 of 2006 of the Family Court.

¶105

These cases were admitted to file and the respondent entered appearance through learned counsel.

¶106

On 12.08.2022, when these matters came up for consideration, this Court directed both the parties to appear in Court on 26.08.2022 at 10.15 a.m. On 26.08.2022, both parties were referred for mediation before the Ernakulam Mediation Centre, in the premises of this Court.

¶107

The parties have now settled the entire dispute in

¶108

¶109

Mat.Appeal Nos.180, 9 & 8 of 2020 and R.P.(FC) Nos.112 & 124 of 2022

¶110

mediation. The mediation settlement agreement dated 14.10.2022 is placed on record, along with the report of the Mediator dated 14.10.2022.

¶111

Today, when these matters are taken up for consideration, the learned counsel on either side would submit that both the parties have settled the entire dispute between them in mediation and in terms of the settlement, various claims of the wife have already been satisfied. Thereafter, in terms of the compromise, the husband and wife have filed a joint petition before the Family Court, Kottayam at Ettumanoor, as O.P.No.1508 of 2022, under Section 10A of the Indian Divorce Act, 1869, for a decree of divorce on mutual consent, which is now pending consideration of that court.

¶112

Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel on both sides and taking note of the filing of a joint petition by both parties under Section 10A of the Indian Divorce Act, seeking a decree of divorce by mutual consent, which is now pending before that court as O.P.No.1508 of

¶113

¶114

Mat.Appeal Nos.180, 9 & 8 of 2020 and R.P.(FC) Nos.112 & 124 of 2022

¶115

2022, these matters are disposed of in terms of the terms and conditions contained in the mediation settlement agreement dated 14.10.2022, which shall form part of this judgment.

¶116

Sd/-

¶117

ANIL K. NARENDRAN, JUDGE

¶118

Sd/P.G. AJITHKUMAR, JUDGE

¶119

dkr

Aneena Elizabeth Varghese v. Jayson Abraham

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aneena Elizabeth Varghese v. Jayson Abraham

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

Jacob Thomas Vs State of Kerala

Radhakrishnan.C Vs R.Deepthi

Geetha Vs Unnikrishnan

Thasreefa Vs Safaras.C

Travancore Devaswom Board Vs National Highway Authority of India

Koodal Maniyam Devaswom Vs State of Kerala