Dismissed

Manishkumar v. Jisha R.Pillai

Kerala HC1 Dec 2022Mat.Appeal/498/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In these matrimonial appeals challenging ex parte decrees of recovery and divorce, the High Court of Kerala dismissed the appeals as withdrawn. The Court held that since the parties had settled all disputes and recorded a settlement agreement on 15.11.2022, which was accepted by the Supreme Court under Article 142, further adjudication was unnecessary.

What did the court decide?

The matrimonial appeals were dismissed as withdrawn based on the terms of the settlement agreement dated 15.11.2022 and the Supreme Court order accepting the settlement.

Manishkumar Vs Jisha R.Pillai — 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
THURSDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF DECEMBER 2022 / 10TH

¶6

AGRAHAYANA, 1944

¶7

MAT. APPEAL NO.495OF 2019

¶8

ARISING OUT OF IMPUGNED EX PARTE DECREE DATED

¶9

22.11.2017 IN O.P.(MONEY)NO.1380 OF 2014 ON THE FILE OF
THE FAMILY COURT, KOLLAM

¶10

APPELLANTS:

¶11

1 MANISHKUMAR,
AGED 36 YEARS,
S/O.SHRI, SHASIDHARAN NAIR, HINDU, R/O.2/17,
PRACHI APARTMENT, SECTOR-287, PRADHIKARAN,
NIGDI, DISTRICT PUNE, MAHARASHTRA-411044

¶12

2 KAMALA SHASHIDHARAN NAIR,
AGED 76 YEARS
W/O.SHRI,.SHASIDHARAN NAIR,
HINDU,R/O.2/17,PRACHI APARTMENT,SECTOR-28,
PRADHIKARAN, NIGDI, DISTRICT PUNE,
MAHARASHTRA-411044 ( THE ABOVE MENTIONED
ADDRESS IS THE CORRECT ADDRESS OF THE
APPELLANTS HOWEVER, IN OP 1380/2014 THE
ADDRESS FURNISHED BY THE PRESENT RESPONDENT IS
WRONG AND IS AS FOLLOWS) MANDOLIL VEEDU,
CHUNAKKARA VILLAGE, NADUVILA MURI, ALAPPUZHA
FROM THEREON NOW RESIDING AT VISHNU VIHAR,
THAMALLAKAL P.O., KUMARAMPURAM, ALAPPUZHA,
KERALA-690 548)

¶13

BY ADV MANISHKUMAR(Party-In-Person)

¶14

RESPONDENT:

¶15

JISHA R. PILLAI,
AGED 36 YEARS

¶16

¶17

Mat. Appeal Nos.495 of 2019 and 498 of 2019

¶18

D/O. RAJENDRA PILLAI, HINDU, PREVIOUSLY: NAVI
MUMBAI, PIN-410210, KHARGHAR,PLOT NO.43 AND
44A,SECTOR 20,GIRIRAJ HORISON A102,FROM THERE
NOW RESIDING AT MADHAVA VILASAM, PULIYILA,
NALLILA P.O., NEDUMBANA VILLAGE, KOLLAM
DISTRICT,KERALA-691 576

¶19

BY ADVS.
SRI.P.B.KRISHNAN
SRI.P.M.NEELAKANDAN
SRI.P.B.SUBRAMANYAN
SRI.SABU GEORGE

¶20

OTHER PRESENT:

¶21

SRI. MANISHKUMAR - PARTY IN PERSON

¶22

THIS MATRIMONIAL APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 01.12.2022, ALONG WITH MAT.APPEAL.498/2019, THE COURT
ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶23

¶24

Mat. Appeal Nos.495 of 2019 and 498 of 2019

¶25

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶26

PRESENT

¶27

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANIL K. NARENDRAN

¶28

¶29

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.G. AJITHKUMAR
THURSDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF DECEMBER 2022 / 10TH

¶30

AGRAHAYANA, 1944

¶31

MAT.APPEAL NO.498OF 2019

¶32

ARISING OUT OF IMPUGNED EX PARTE DECREE DATED
22.11.2017 IN O.P.(HMA) NO.78 OF 2015 ON THE FILE OF
THE FAMILY COURT, KOLLAM

¶33

APPELLANT:

¶34

MANISHKUMAR,
AGED 36 YEARS,
S/O SHRI.SHASHIDHARAN NAIR, HINDU, R/O 2/17
PRACHI APARTMENT, SECTOR-28,PRADHIKARAN,
NIGDI, DISTRICT PUNE, MAHARASHTRA-411044. (THE
ABOVE MENTIONED ADDRESS IS THE CORRECT ADDRESS
OF THE APPELLANT HOWEVER, IN OP 78/2015 THE
ADDRESS FURNISHED BY THE PRESENT RESPONDENT IS
WRONG AND IS AS FOLLOWS) MANDOLIL VEEDU,
CHUNAKKARA VILLAGE, NADUVILA MURI, ALAPPUZHA
FROM THEREON NOW RESIDING AT VISHNU VIHAR,
THAMALLAKKAL P.O., KUMARAPURAM, VISHNU VIHAR,
THAMALLAKKAL P.O., KUMARAPURAM, ALAPPUZHA,
KERALA-690 548)

¶35

BY ADV MANISHKUMAR(Party-In-Person)

¶36

RESPONDENT:

¶37

JISHA R. PILLAI,
AGED 36 YEARS,
D/O RAJENDRAN PILLAI, HINDU, PREVIOUSLY: NAVI
MUMBAI , PIN 410 210,KHARGHAR, PLOT NO 43, AND
44 A SECTOR 20, GIRIRAJ HORISON A 102, FROM
THERE NOW RESIDING AT, MADHAVA VILASAM,
PULIYILA, NALLILA P.O., NEDUMBANA VILLAGE,

¶38

¶39

Mat. Appeal Nos.495 of 2019 and 498 of 2019

¶40

KOLLAM DISTRICT,KERALA-691576

¶41

BY ADVS.
SRI.P.B.KRISHNAN
SRI.P.M.NEELAKANDAN
SRI.P.B.SUBRAMANYAN
SRI.SABU GEORGE

¶42

THIS MATRIMONIAL APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION

¶43

ON 01.12.2022, ALONG WITH MAT.APPEAL.495/2019, THE COURT
ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶44

¶45

Mat. Appeal Nos.495 of 2019 and 498 of 2019

¶46

JUDGMENT

¶47

Anil K. Narendran, J.

¶48

Mat. Appeal No.495 of 2019:- The appellants are the respondents in O.P.(Money)No.1380 of 2014, which was one filed by the respondent-wife of the 1^st appellant, seeking recovery of patrimony and gold ornaments. That original petition was allowed ex-parte by the judgment and decree dated 22.11.2017 of the Family Court, Kollam. Feeling aggrieved, the appellants have filed this appeal, invoking the provisions under Section 19(1) of the Family Courts Act, 1985, along with C.M.Application No.1 of 2019, for condonation of delay.

¶49

Mat. Appeal No.498 of 2019:- The appellant is the respondent in O.P.(HMA)No.78 of 2015 on the file of the Family Court, Kollam, which is one filed by the respondentwife, seeking a decree of divorce under Section 13(1)(ib) of the Hindu Marriage Act for dissolution of the marriage solemnized between the appellant and respondent on 02.11.2008. That original petition was allowed ex-parte by the judgment and decree dated 22.11.2017. Feeling aggrieved, the appellant filed this appeal, invoking the

¶50

¶51

Mat. Appeal Nos.495 of 2019 and 498 of 2019

¶52

provisions under Section 19(1) of the Family Courts Act, 1985, along with C.M.Application No.1 of 2019, for condonation of delay.

¶53

During the pendency of these appeals, the disputes between the parties were settled and that settlement agreement was recorded in the order dated 23.11.2022 of the Apex Court in I.A.No.176728 of 2022 in Transfrer Petiton

¶54

(Crl.)No.206 of 2018. The said order reads thus;

¶55

“We are informed by the petitioner-in-person and learned counsel for the respondent(s) that the parties have amicably settled all their disputes and have reduced the settlement terms into writing in the form of Settlement Agreement on 15.11.2022 (Annexure P8 to I.A.No.176728 of 2022). They also prayed for passing appropriate decree or order under Article 142 of the Constitution of India. The Settlement Agreement has been placed on the record. All the statements made in the Settlement Agreement made by the respective parties are treated as an undertaking to this Court.

¶56

Having regard to the above, we are satisfied that the settlement entered into between the parties on 15.11.2022 deserves to be accepted, as also the prayer jointly made by the parties in application for decree, in exercise of our powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India, we direct that all the cases mentioned in the Settlement Agreement which have to be settled amicably are directed to be quashed and set

¶57

¶58

Mat. Appeal Nos.495 of 2019 and 498 of 2019

¶59

aside.

¶60

Ordered accordingly.

¶61

The transfer petition and I.A.No.176728 of 2022 stand(s) disposed of in the above terms.

¶62

The matter is directed to be kept after 90 days only for reporting compliance.

¶63

The registry is directed to intimate about the same to the respective Court(s).

¶64

Pending applications, if any, stand disposed of.”

¶65

A copy of the settlement agreement dated 15.11.2022, is placed on record along with I.A.No.1 of 2022

¶66

in Mat. Appeal No.495 of 2019. Clause VI of the settlement agreement which deals with Mat. Appeal Nos.495 of 2019 and 498 of 2019 reads thus;

¶67

“VI. That the parties shall pray before the Hon’ble Supreme Court to allow withdrawal of Mat. Appeal bearing No.495 of 2019 filed by the petitioners before the Hon’ble High Court of Kerala against the ex-parte decree order of recovery of Rs.94,10,000/- (Rupees Ninety Four Lakhs Ten Thousand Only) passed by the Ld. Family Court, Kollam in favour of the 2^nd respondent in O.P.(Money)No.1380 of 2014 and also pray for allowing withdrawal of Mat.Appeal bearing No.498 of 2019 filed by the 1^st petitioner before the Hon’ble High Court of Kerala against the ex-parte decree of divorce granted to the 2^nd respondent as on 22.11.2017 by the Ld.Family Court, Kollam.”

¶68

Heard the appellant, who appeared in person and

¶69

¶70

Mat. Appeal Nos.495 of 2019 and 498 of 2019

¶71

also the learned counsel for the respondent.

¶72

The appellant and also the learned counsel for the

¶73

respondent would submit that since the parties have settled the disputes, these appeals can be dismissed as withdrawn, in terms of the terms and conditions contained in the settlement agreement dated 15.11.2022 and also the order of the Apex Court dated 23.11.2022 in Transfer Petition (Crl)No.206 of 2018.

¶74

Accordingly based on the aforesaid submission, these

¶75

appeals are dismissed as withdrawn, in terms of the terms and conditions of that settlement agreement.

¶76

Sd/-

¶77

ANIL K. NARENDRAN, JUDGE

¶78

Sd/-

¶79

P.G. AJITHKUMAR, JUDGE

¶80

MIN

Manishkumar v. Jisha R.Pillai

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manishkumar v. Jisha R.Pillai

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

Vasudevan C.K. Vs Divya

Shaji Sundar S Vs Deepa

Saseendran Mundakkal Vs the Commissioner, Malabar Devaswom Board

Muhammed Amjadkhan Vs Shafna

Sivaprasad Vs Divya Prasannan

Manishkumar Vs Jisha R.Pillai