Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Sajeebkhan Vs. Jasmine

Sajeebkhan vs Jasmine

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Jan 15, 2013
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1010541

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Kerala High Court
Judge
Decided On
Subject
Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue
Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Sajeebkhan

Respondent

Jasmine

Excerpt

in the high court of kerala at ernakulam present: the honourable mr.justice v.k.mohanan tuesday, the 15th day of january 2013 25th pousha 193 rpfc.no. 17 of 2013 () ---------------------- mc.264/2010 dated 22 11-2012 revision petitioner(s)/complainant: ----------------------------------- sajeebkhan s/o. basheer,sajeev house,alamukku kunnanvenga,nedumangad. by adv. sri.m.dinesh respondent(s)/accused : ----------------------- 1.jasmine d/o.abdul azez,jasmine manzil,thonnakkal kudavoor p.o,thiruvananthapuramn”313. 2.nafzia aged 2 = years,d/o.jasmine,jasmine manzil thonnakkal,kudavoor p.o,thiruvananthapuram -695 313. this rev.petition(family court) having been finally heard on 15-01-2013, the court on the same day passed the following: ami/ v.k.mohanan, j.------------------------------- r.p.(f.c.) no.17 of 2013 ------------------------------- dated this the 15th day of january, 2013. order counsel for the petitioner, after hearing the matter to a certain extent and especially when this court is reluctant to interfere with the impugned judgment of the appellate court and the exparte order of the trial court, sought permission of this court to withdraw the same. i find no reason to reject the above request. accordingly, the above revision petition is dismissed. but i have no hesitation to observe that the dismissal of this revision petition will not stand in the way of the petitioner to work out any other legal remedy. the registry is directed to hand over the originals of the documents produced along with this revision petition to the counsel for the revision petitioner. sd/- v.k.mohanan, judge ami/ //true copy// p.a. to judge

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN TUESDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF JANUARY 2013 25TH POUSHA 193 RPFC.No. 17 of 2013 () ---------------------- MC.264/2010 DATED 22 11-2012 REVISION PETITIONER(S)/COMPLAINANT: ----------------------------------- SAJEEBKHAN S/O. BASHEER,SAJEEV HOUSE,ALAMUKKU KUNNANVENGA,NEDUMANGAD. BY ADV. SRI.M.DINESH RESPONDENT(S)/ACCUSED : ----------------------- 1.JASMINE D/O.ABDUL AZEZ,JASMINE MANZIL,THONNAKKAL KUDAVOOR P.O,THIRUVANANTHAPURAMN”

313. 2.NAFZIA AGED 2 = YEARS,D/O.JASMINE,JASMINE MANZIL THONNAKKAL,KUDAVOOR P.O,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -695 313. THIS REV.PETITION(FAMILY COURT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15-01-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ami/ V.K.MOHANAN, J.

------------------------------- R.P.(F.C.) No.17 of 2013 ------------------------------- Dated this the 15th day of January, 2013. ORDER

Counsel for the petitioner, after hearing the matter to a certain extent and especially when this Court is reluctant to interfere with the impugned judgment of the appellate court and the exparte order of the trial court, sought permission of this Court to withdraw the same. I find no reason to reject the above request. Accordingly, the above revision petition is dismissed. But I have no hesitation to observe that the dismissal of this revision petition will not stand in the way of the petitioner to work out any other legal remedy. The Registry is directed to hand over the originals of the documents produced along with this revision petition to the counsel for the revision petitioner. Sd/- V.K.MOHANAN, Judge ami/ //True copy// P.A. to Judge

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial