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.

Baby Vs. Jemy

Baby vs Jemy

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Jan 01, 2014
~4 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1119439

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

Baby

Respondent

Jemy

Excerpt

.....passed ext.p6 order calling upon the petitioner to furnish security to the extent of rs.10 lakhs by 1.1.2014 and prohibiting him from transferring or charging the properties prescribed in the schedule to ext.p4. thereupon the petitioner filed ext.p5, i.a.no.2256/2013 requesting to restrict the attachment in the o.p.(fc)no.4596/13 2 order, in the manner as prayed for therein.4. in this o.p.(fc), what the petitioner seeks is that he having not furnished the security as called upon in ext.p6, the court should be directed to pass consequential order as contemplated in order xxxviii rule 6 of the c.p.c. in a time bound manner.5. admittedly, the petitioner did not furnish security as called upon in ext.p6. this necessarily requires the court to pass order under order xxxviii rule 6 of the c.p.c.6. therefore, we dispose of this o.p.(fc) directing that the family court, irinjalakuda shall proceed to pass order as indicated above duly adverting to ext.p5, i.a.no.2256/2013 also. this shall be done as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within three weeks on production of a copy of this judgment.7. it is made clear that this court has not expressed anything on merits and it is entirely for the family court to pass orders in accordance with law. o.p.(fc)no.4596/13 3 the petitioner will produce a copy of this judgment before the family court, irinjalakuda for information and compliance. antony dominic, judge p.d. rajan, judge. acd o.p.(fc)no.4596/13 4 o.p.(fc)no.4596/13 5

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.D.RAJAN WEDNESDAY, THE1T DAY OF JANUARY201411TH POUSHA, 1935 OP (FC).No. 4596 of 2013 (R) ----------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER

IN I.A.NO.2203/2013 IN OP9022013 of FAMILY COURT, IRINJALAKUDA DATED1312/2013 PETITIONER(S): -------------------------- BABY AGED62YEARS S/O.KALATHINGAL SEBASTIAN, KANAKAMALA DESOM KODAKARA VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK THRISSUR DISTRICT BY ADV. SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR) RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- JEMY, AGED24YEARS STAFF NURSE, D/O.JOHNY, ERMAKATPARAMBIL HOUSE IRINJALAKUDA DESOM, MANAVALASSERY VILLAGE MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT680121 THIS OP (FAMILYCOURT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON0101-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: acd OP (FC).No. 4596 of 2013 (R) ----------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- EXHIBIT P1 ATRUE COPY OF THE OP NO 1365 OF2012BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT,IRINJALAKUDA DATED1010/2012 EXHIBIT P2 ATRUE COPY OF THE MC N O110OF 2013 DATED215/2013 ON THE FILED OF THE FAMILY COURT,IRINJALAKUDA EXHIBIT P3 ATRUE COPY OF THE OP NO902OF 2013 DATED1112/2013 EXHIBIT P4 ATRUE COPY OF IA NO 2203 OF2013IN OP NO902OF 2013 DATED1112/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE FAMILY COURT,IRINJALAKUDA EXHIBIT P5 ATRUE COPY OF IA NO 2256 OF2013IN EXT P5 DATED1212/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE FAMILY COURT,IRINJALAKUDA EXHIBIT P6 ATRUE COPY OF THE ORDEER PASSED IN IA NO 2203 OF2013IN OP NO902OF 2013 DATED1312/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE FAMILY COURT,IRINJALAKUDA RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS ---------------------------------------: NIL. True Copy PA to Judge. acd ANTONY DOMINIC & P.D. RAJAN, JJ.

------------------------------------------- O.P.(FC)No.4596 of 2013 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 1st day of January, 2014 JUDGMENT

ANTONY DOMINIC,J.

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner.

2. The grievance of the petitioner in this O.P.(FC) is against Ext.P6 order passed by the Family Court, Irinjalakuda in I.A.No.2203/2013 in O.P.No.902/2013.

3. Briefly stated, the case is that Ext.P3 O.P. was filed by the respondent herein claiming damages of Rs.26 lakhs from the petitioner. In that O.P., the respondent filed I.A. No.2203/2013 for attachment over the properties scheduled to the said I.A. A copy of the I.A. is Ext.P4. On Ext.P4, the Family Court passed Ext.P6 order calling upon the petitioner to furnish security to the extent of Rs.10 lakhs by 1.1.2014 and prohibiting him from transferring or charging the properties prescribed in the schedule to Ext.P4. Thereupon the petitioner filed Ext.P5, I.A.No.2256/2013 requesting to restrict the attachment in the O.P.(FC)No.4596/13 2 order, in the manner as prayed for therein.

4. In this O.P.(FC), what the petitioner seeks is that he having not furnished the security as called upon in Ext.P6, the Court should be directed to pass consequential order as contemplated in Order XXXVIII Rule 6 of the C.P.C. in a time bound manner.

5. Admittedly, the petitioner did not furnish security as called upon in Ext.P6. This necessarily requires the Court to pass order under Order XXXVIII Rule 6 of the C.P.C.

6. Therefore, we dispose of this O.P.(FC) directing that the Family Court, Irinjalakuda shall proceed to pass order as indicated above duly adverting to Ext.P5, I.A.No.2256/2013 also. This shall be done as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within three weeks on production of a copy of this judgment.

7. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed anything on merits and it is entirely for the Family Court to pass orders in accordance with law. O.P.(FC)No.4596/13 3 The petitioner will produce a copy of this judgment before the Family Court, Irinjalakuda for information and compliance. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE P.D. RAJAN, JUDGE. acd O.P.(FC)No.4596/13 4 O.P.(FC)No.4596/13 5

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial