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.

Sheeja Mol Vs. P. Sunil

Sheeja Mol vs P. Sunil

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Aug 12, 2013
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1022140

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

Sheeja Mol

Respondent

P. Sunil

Excerpt

.....the court on the same day delivered the following: rs. op (fc).no. 1846 of 2013 (r) appendix petitioner's exhibits:- exhibit p1. true copy of the order dated 19 02/2009 in op no.668/2008 of familycourt, kozhikode. exhibit p2. true copy of the order dated 01 07/2009in op no.449/2009 of familycourt, kozhikode. exhibit p3. true copy of the affidavit dated 02 09/2011 in ia no.1725/2011 in op.no.449/2009 filed by the respondent . exhibit p4. true copy of the counter statement filed by the petitioner in ia no.1725/2011. exhibit p5. true copy of the order dated 22 09/2011 in ia no.1725/2011 in op.no.449/2009 of family court, kozhikode. exhibit p6. true copy of the affidavit in ia no.104/2013 in op.no.449/2009 filed by the respondent. exhibit p7. true copy of the counter statement filed by the petitioner in ia. no.104/2013. exhibit p8. true copy of the complaint dated 23 03/2013 filed by the petitioner in ia no.104/2013 before the sheristadar, family court, kozhikode. exhibit p9. true copy of the order dated 26 04/2013 in ia no.104/2013 in op no.449/2009 of familycourt, kozhikode. exhibit p10 copy of the i.a.504/2013 dated 27 05/2013 filed by the respondent before familycourt, kozhikode. respondent's exhibits:- ext.r1 copy of the mo receipts sent by respondent to the petitioner. ext.r2 copy of the bank account statement of the respondent. ext.r3 copy of the term deposit receipt in the name of minor by respondent. ext.r4 copy of the 6 sheets extracts of 2.photographs of the child with the respondent and relatives. //true copy// p.a. to judge. rs. antony dominic & p.d. rajan, jj.------------------------------------------- o.p.(fc)no.1846 of 2013 ---------------------------------------------- dated this the 12th day of august, 2013 judgmentantony dominic,j.from the submissions made by both sides, it is seen that the dispute in o.p.no.449/2009 on the file of the family court, kozhikode itself has been settled between the parties in mediation at kozhikode. in such.....

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.D.RAJAN MONDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF AUGUST 2013 21ST SRAVANA, 1935 OP (FC).No. 1846 of 2013 (R) ----------------------------- I.A. NO.104/2013 IN OP.NO. 449/2009 OF FAMILY COURT, KOZHIKODE. ............ PETITIONER-(RESPONDENT IN I.A.104/2013 IN OP.NO. 449/2009): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SHEEJA MOL, D/O.BALAN, SREE KOUSTHUBHAM, THATTARI PARAMBA, VELLIMADUKUNNU, KOZHIKODE-673 012. BY ADV. SMT.ASHA CHERIAN. RESPONDENT-(PETITIONER IN I.A.104/2013 IN OP.NO. 449/2009): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- P. SUNIL, S/O.BHASKARAN MASTER, SOURABYA, KIZHUKKARAPARAMBA, CHEVAYUR, KOZHIKODE-673 017. BY ADVS. SRI.MANJERI SUNDERRAJ, SMT.K.K.PREETHA. THIS OP (FAMILY COURT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12-08-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs. OP (FC).No. 1846 of 2013 (R) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:- EXHIBIT P1. TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 19 02/2009 IN OP NO.668/2008 OF FAMILYCOURT, KOZHIKODE. EXHIBIT P2. TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 01 07/2009IN OP NO.449/2009 OF FAMILYCOURT, KOZHIKODE. EXHIBIT P3. TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT DATED 02 09/2011 IN IA NO.1725/2011 IN OP.NO.449/2009 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT . EXHIBIT P4. TRUE COPY OF THE COUNTER STATEMENT FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN IA NO.1725/2011. EXHIBIT P5. TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 22 09/2011 IN IA NO.1725/2011 IN OP.NO.449/2009 OF FAMILY COURT, KOZHIKODE. EXHIBIT P6. TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT IN IA NO.104/2013 IN OP.NO.449/2009 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P7. TRUE COPY OF THE COUNTER STATEMENT FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN IA. NO.104/2013. EXHIBIT P8. TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 23 03/2013 FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN IA NO.104/2013 BEFORE THE SHERISTADAR, FAMILY COURT, KOZHIKODE. EXHIBIT P9. TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 26 04/2013 IN IA NO.104/2013 IN OP NO.449/2009 OF FAMILYCOURT, KOZHIKODE. EXHIBIT P10 COPY OF THE I.A.504/2013 DATED 27 05/2013 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT BEFORE FAMILYCOURT, KOZHIKODE. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:- EXT.R1 COPY OF THE MO RECEIPTS SENT BY RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.R2 COPY OF THE BANK ACCOUNT STATEMENT OF THE RESPONDENT. EXT.R3 COPY OF THE TERM DEPOSIT RECEIPT IN THE NAME OF MINOR BY RESPONDENT. EXT.R4 COPY OF THE 6 SHEETS EXTRACTS OF 2.PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE CHILD WITH THE RESPONDENT AND RELATIVES. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. rs. ANTONY DOMINIC & P.D. RAJAN, JJ.

------------------------------------------- O.P.(FC)No.1846 of 2013 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 12th day of August, 2013 JUDGMENT

ANTONY DOMINIC,J.

From the submissions made by both sides, it is seen that the dispute in O.P.No.449/2009 on the file of the Family Court, Kozhikode itself has been settled between the parties in mediation at Kozhikode. In such circumstances, there is no warrant for examining the validity of the interim order passed by the Family Court in the aforesaid O.P., which is challenged in this original petition (FC). Accordingly, the O.P.(FC) is closed. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE P.D. RAJAN, JUDGE. acd

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial