Allowed

Elizuba Ammu Philip v. Jinu Thomas

Kerala HC28 Nov 2022OP (FC)/376/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed an original petition under Article 227. It set aside the Family Court's order dismissing an application for counseling because both parties were abroad and unable to appear physically. The court directed the Family Court to reconsider the matter afresh.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order dated 04.05.2022 in I.A.No.1 of 2022 in O.P.No.1492 of 2018 was set aside. The Family Court is directed to consider the I.A. afresh after hearing both sides.

Elizuba Ammu Philip Vs Jinu Thomas — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | 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

MONDAY, THE 28^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 7TH AGRAHAYANA, 1944 OP (FC) NO. 376 OF 2022

¶7

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN OPDIV 1492/2018 OF FAMILY COURT, KOTTAYAM

¶8

PETITIONER/S:

¶9

ELIZUBA AMMU PHILIP AGED 38 YEARS KAVALAPPARA HOUSE KUMARAKOM EAST P.O. KOTTAYAM DISTRICT KERALA, PIN - 686563 BY ADVS. LUKE J CHIRAYIL M.G.SREEJITH DEJOHN P. ANTONY TANIYA SALIM FRENY JOSEPH VIDYAJITH M.

¶10

RESPONDENT/S:

¶11

JINU THOMAS AGED 43 YEARS GARDNER AVE HICKSVILLE, NY 11801, USA, REPRESENTED BY POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER MR. T.C. VARGHESE, AGED ABOUT 83 YEARS SON OF MR. CHANDY, GRACE VILLA, MANJADI P.O. THIRUVALLA TALUK, THIRUVALLA, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT KERALA, PIN - 689105 BY ADV K.N.RADHAKRISHNAN (THIRUVALLA)

¶12

THIS OP (FAMILY COURT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28.11.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

OPFC.No.376 of 2022

JUDGMENT

Dated this the 28th day of November, 2022

¶17

P.G. Ajithkumar, J.

¶18

Respondent in O.P.No.1492 of 2018 on the files of the Family Court, Kottayam at Ettumanoor has filed this Original Petition under Article 227 of Constitution of India. The petitioner seeks to set aside the order of the Family Court in I.A.No. 1 of 2022 in O.P.No.1492 of 2018 dated 04.05.2020.

¶19

on 30.06.2022, notice was directed to be served on

¶20

the respondent. The respondent entered appearance through his counsel.

¶21

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner

¶22

and the learned counsel appearing for the respondent

¶23

I.A.No.1 of 2022 was filed by the petitioner seeking to

¶24

order an effective counseling and for that purpose to direct the respondent to appear before the Family Court. The Family Court after considering the matter dismissed it as per the impugned order. The Family Court observed that several opportunities were given to the parties to appear before the court for counseling, but the petitioner who is the respondent herein, did not appear before the court, the Family Court therefore held that no purpose would be served by adjourning the matter.

¶25

OPFC.No.376 of 2022

¶26

¶27

5. The respondent-husband is abroad. The learned

¶28

counsel appearing for the respondent would submit that he does not know Malayalam being a person born and brought up abroad. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that an effective counseling would be possible only if the parties appear physically. When the petitioner is abroad, it is inappropriate to direct him to appear before the court for the purpose of counseling alone. In Shanthini v. Vijaya Venkitesh [2018(1) SCC 1] the Apex Court laid down the parameters for conducting various proceedings in a case before the Family Court through video conferencing. A counseling through video conferencing is not prohibited. Therefore, it is for the Family Court to reconsider the matter.

¶29

Hence, this Original Petition is allowed. The order dated 04.05.2022 in I.A.No.1 of 2022 in O.P.No.1492 of 2018 is set aside. The Family Court is directed to consider I.A. No.1 of 2022 afresh after hearing both sides.

¶30

Sd/-

¶31

ANIL K. NARENDRAN, JUDGE

¶32

Sd/P.G. AJITHKUMAR, JUDGE

Dxy

OPFC.No.376 of 2022

APPENDIX OF OP (FC) 376/2022

¶37

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶38

Exhibit-P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 10.10.2018 IN TR.P(C) NO. 511 OF 2018 ON THE FILES OF THE HONORABLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA Exhibit-P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION NUMBERED AS O.P. (DIV) NO. 1492 OF 2018 ON THE FILES OF THE HONORABLE FAMILY COURT, ETTUMANOOR Exhibit-P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION NUMBERED AS I.A. NO. 1 OF 2022 IN O.P. NO. 1492/2018 ON THE FILES OF THE HONORABLE FAMILY COURT ETTUMANOOR Exhibit-P4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE CASE STATUS OF O.P. NO. 1492/2018 ON THE FILES OF THE HONORABLE FAMILY COURT ETTUMANOOR Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 04.05.2022 IN I.A. NO. 1 OF 2022 IN O.P. NO. 1492 OF 2018 ON THE FILES OF THE HONORABLE COURT OF THE JUDGE, FAMILY COURT KOTTAYAM AT ETTUMANOOR

Elizuba Ammu Philip v. Jinu Thomas

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Elizuba Ammu Philip v. Jinu Thomas

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rasiq Vs Nejmu

A.Damodaran Namboothiri Vs Commissioner, Malabar Devaswom Board

Happy Maxwell Vs Mazwell M. Chennur

Sajeev, Vs the State of Kerala

Amit Panikulam Rep. by Power of Attorney Holder Donny Panikulam Vs Chris Babu Abraham @ Babu a. Kallivayalil

Anoop Chandran Vs Divya R.Nair