Dismissed
Jansy K.J. v. V.C. Rajendran
Kerala HCRP/554/2022
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE…
What the court decided
AI extract
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SOPHY THOMAS
MONDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF JULY 2022 / 20TH ASHADHA, 1944
RP NO. 554 OF 2022
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN OP (FC) 337/2022 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 16.06.2022
REVIEW PETITIONERS/PETITIONERS:
1 JANSY K.J. AGED 41 YEARS D/O. JAYAPRAKASH, KALLUMMADATHIL HOUSE, NAYARAMBALAM P.O, KOCHI TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN – 682509.
2 NEHA V. RAJENDRAN (MINOR), AGED 15 YEARS D/O V.C. RAJENDRAN, KALLUMADATHIL HOUSE, NAYARAMBALAM P.O., KOCHI TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN:- 682509 REPRESENTED BY HER MOTHER AND 1ST PETITIONER, JANSY K.J., AGED 41 YEARS, D/O. JAYAPRAKASH, KALLUMMADATHIL HOUSE, NAYARAMBALAM P.O, KOCHI TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN – 682509.
BY ADVS. P.HARIDAS SHIJIMOL M.MATHEW P.C.SHIJIN RISHIKESH HARIDAS BIJU HARIHARAN
RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT:
V.C. RAJENDRAN AGED 50 YEARS S/O E.N. CHANDRAN, VALIYAPARAMBIL HOUSE, PUTHENVELIKKARA P.O., PARAVUR TALUK, NORTH PARAVUR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, , PIN – 683 594.
THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11.07.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
R.P No.554 of 2022
2
A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE & SOPHY THOMAS, JJ.
R.P. No.554 of 2022 IN
O.P (FC) No.337 OF 2022
Dated this the 11th day of July, 2022
O R D E R
A.Muhamed Mustaque, J.
This review petition is filed by the petitioners seeking review of the judgment in O.P (F.C) No.337 of 2022 dated 16.06.2022.
relation to reference to Ext.P2 application pending before the Family Court, Ernakulam. While disposing the original petition, this Court referred Ext.P2 as an application for interim custody. But, actually Ext.P2 is an application for interim maintenance.
Therefore, the judgment dated 16.06.2022 shall be corrected to refer Ext.P2 as an application for interim maintenance.
This review petition is accordingly disposed of.
Sd/-
A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE JUDGE
Sd/- SOPHY THOMAS JUDGE
smp
Jansy K.J.
Neha V. Rajendran
V.C. Rajendran
A.Muhamed Mustaque
Sophy Thomas
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court