Dismissed

Anilkuamr v. Soumya

Kerala HC18 Jan 2023Mat.Appeal/1226/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

On January 18, 2023, the High Court of Kerala disposed of a matrimonial appeal and cross objection concerning disputed ornaments and money. Upon the counsel's submission that parties had settled via mediation, the court dismissed both proceedings without adjudicating merits.

What did the court decide?

Both the Mat. Appeal No. 1226 of 2017 and Cross Objection No. 141 of 2019 were dismissed on the basis of settlement in mediation.

Anilkuamr Vs Soumya — Property and Title | Kerala HC (2023)

¶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

WEDNESDAY, THE 18^TH DAY OF JANUARY 2023 / 28TH POUSHA, 1944 MAT.APPEAL NO.1226 OF 2017

¶7

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 08.11.2016 IN O.P NO.672 OF 2009 ON THE FILE OF THE FAMILY COURT, KOTTARAKKARA APPELLANT/RESPONDENT:

¶8

ANILKUAMR

¶9

AGED 38 YEARS, S/O. SADASIVAN PILLAI, MELOOTTU VEEDU,MADANTHACODU MURI, KAREEPRA VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT.

¶10

BY ADVS. SRI.R.MOHANA BABU SRI.M.AJITH KARICODE SRI.N.P.PRADEEP

¶11

RESPONDENT/PETITIONER:

¶12

SOUMYA

¶13

AGED 31 YEARS, D/O.SOUDAMINI, SOUMYA BHAVAN,VAKKANADU MURI, KAREEPRA VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT – 691 001

¶14

BY ADVS. SRI.ALEXANDER GEORGE SMT.K.K.NESNA

¶15

THIS CROSS OBJECTION/CROSS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18.01.2023, ALONG WITH CO.141/2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

¶17

Mat.Appeal No.1226 of 2017 and Cross Objection No.141 of 2019

¶18

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶19

PRESENT

¶20

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN

¶21

¶22

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.G. AJITHKUMAR

¶23

WEDNESDAY, THE 18^TH DAY OF JANUARY 2023 / 28TH POUSHA,

¶24

1944

¶25

CO NO. 141 OF 2019

¶26

¶27

Mat.Appeal No.1226 OF 2017 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA

¶28

(APPEAL AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 08.11.2016 PASSED BY THE FAMILY COURT, KOTTARAKKARA IN O.P.No.672 OF 2009)

¶29

CROSS OBJECTOR/PETITIONER IN O.P.No.682 OF 2009:

¶30

SOUMYA

¶31

AGED 33 YEARS

¶32

D/O.SOUDAMINI, SOUMYA BHAVAN, VAKKANADUMURI, KAREEPRA VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT

¶33

BY ADV.

¶34

ALEXANDER GEORGE

¶35

RESPONDENT/APPELLANT/RESPONDENT:

¶36

ANILKUMAR

¶37

AGED 38 YEARS SADASIVAN PILLAI, MELOOTTU VEEDU, MADANTHACODUMURI, KAREEPRA VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT - 691 509

¶38

THIS CROSS OBJECTION/CROSS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18.01.2023, ALONG WITH Mat.Appeal.1226/2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶39

¶40

Mat.Appeal No.1226 of 2017 and Cross Objection No.141 of 2019

¶41

J U D G M E N T

¶42

Anil K Narendran, J.

¶43

Mat.Appeal No.1226 of 2017

¶44

The appellant is the 1^st respondent in O.P.No.672 of 2009 on the file of the Family Court, Kottarakkara, which is one filed by the respondent herein-wife seeking return of 101 sovereigns of gold ornaments and a sum of Rs.2,50,000/-. That original petition was allowed by the judgment and decree dated 08.11.2016. The operative portion of that judgment reads thus:

¶45

“14. In the result, O.P.No.672 of 2009 is allowed and a decree is passed in the following lines:

¶46

“1. The first respondent is directed to pay an amount of Rs.2,50,000/- to the petitioner within one month from this date failing which the petitioner is entitled to realise the amount with interest @ 6% p.a from this date till realisation from the 1^st respondent and his assets.

¶47

The 1^st respondent is directed to return 101 sovereigns of gold ornaments scheduled in the petition or its market value amounting

¶48

¶49

Mat.Appeal No.1226 of 2017 and Cross Objection No.141 of 2019

¶50

to Rs.11,11,000/- within one month from this date failing which the petitioner is entitled to realise the said amount from the assets of the 1^st respondent.

¶51

The claim as against the other respondents in the O.P is disallowed.”

¶52

1.1. Feeling aggrieved, the appellant filed this appeal,

¶53

invoking the provisions under Section 19(1) of the Family Courts Act, 1984 along with C.M.Application No.4055 of 2017 for condonation of delay. By the order dated 01.03.2019, the delay of 319 days in filing this appeal was condoned. By the order dated 29.03.2019, both parties were referred for mediation before the Ernakulam Mediation Centre, in the premises of this Court on 29.03.2022. The matter could not be settled in mediation.

¶54

2. Cross Objection No.141 of 2019

¶55

2.1. The respondent herein-wife of the appellant has

¶56

filed this cross objection under Section 19 of the Family Courts Act, 1984 read with Order XLI, Rule 22 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

¶57

¶58

Mat.Appeal No.1226 of 2017 and Cross Objection No.141 of 2019

¶59

Today, when these matters are taken up for consideration, the learned counsel on both sides would submit that the parties have settled the disputes in mediation before the Mediation Sub Centre, Kottarakkara and therefore, they do not want to prosecute this Mat.Appeal and Cross Objection further.

¶60

Based on the aforesaid submission made by the learned counsel on both sides, the Mat.Appeal and Cross Objection are dismissed.

¶61

Sd/-

¶62

ANIL K. NARENDRAN, JUDGE

¶63

Sd/- P.G. AJITHKUMAR, JUDGE

¶64

Anilkuamr v. Soumya

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anilkuamr v. Soumya

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sulfikkar K. v Vs Nijina

Sajna P.J Vs Isahak Ismail

Roy John Vs Priya. T.Samuel

Ramachandran Nair Vs State of Kerala

Abdul Mujeeb Vs Suja

Divyaunni Vs Rajith