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.

Sameera , vs Rafeeq,

Sameera , vs Rafeeq,

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Nov 15, 2023
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1362129

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
Case Number
Mat.Appeal/388/2022

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Sameera ,

Respondent

Rafeeq,

Excerpt

in the high court of kerala at ernakulampresent the honourable mr. justice amit rawal & the honourable mrs. justice c.s. sudha wednesday, the 15th day of november 2023 / 24th karthika, mat.appeal no. 388 of 2022 against the common order and decree dated 11.07.2019 ino.p.no.78/2016 on the files of the family court, malapuram appellant/respondent: sameera, aged 38 years, d/o. beerankutty, keezhedath house, karuvambram post, manjeri, malappuram-676 123. by advs. alex.m.scaria a.j.riyas saritha thomas johnson joseph alen j. cheruvil respondent/petitioner: rafeeq, aged 42 years, s/o. kalangadan muhammed haji, residing at chenakkaparambil house, nediyirippu post, pothuvettippara, kondotty, malappuram district - 673 638. by adv p.samsudin (b/o) this matrimonial appeal having come up for final hearing on 15.11.2023, the court on the same day delivered the following: amit rawal & c.s.sudha, jj. ------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------- dated this the 15th day of november, 2023judgmentamit rawal, j.learned counsel appearing for the respondent in this appeal, filed by the wife against the decree dated 11.07.2019 in o.p.no.78/2016 granting restitution of conjugal rights in favour of the husband, submits that owing to the subsequent events, the husband has remarried and do not want to press the claim in o.p.no.78/2016. in view of the fact that the husband has re- married, the judgment and decree passed in o.p.no.78/2016 would not survive. appeal stands disposed of in the aforementioned terms. amit rawal c.s.sudha ak

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE C.S. SUDHA WEDNESDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2023 / 24TH KARTHIKA, MAT.APPEAL NO. 388 OF 2022 AGAINST THE COMMON ORDER AND DECREE DATED 11.07.2019 IN

O.P.NO.78/2016 ON THE FILES OF THE FAMILY COURT, MALAPURAM APPELLANT/RESPONDENT: SAMEERA, AGED 38 YEARS, D/O. BEERANKUTTY, KEEZHEDATH HOUSE, KARUVAMBRAM POST, MANJERI, MALAPPURAM-676 123. BY ADVS. ALEX.M.SCARIA A.J.RIYAS SARITHA THOMAS JOHNSON JOSEPH ALEN J. CHERUVIL RESPONDENT/PETITIONER: RAFEEQ, AGED 42 YEARS, S/O. KALANGADAN MUHAMMED HAJI, RESIDING AT CHENAKKAPARAMBIL HOUSE, NEDIYIRIPPU POST, POTHUVETTIPPARA, KONDOTTY, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 673 638. BY ADV P.SAMSUDIN (B/O) THIS MATRIMONIAL APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR FINAL HEARING ON 15.11.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: AMIT RAWAL & C.S.SUDHA, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 15th day of November, 2023

JUDGMENT

Amit Rawal, J.

Learned counsel appearing for the respondent in this appeal, filed by the wife against the decree dated 11.07.2019 in O.P.No.78/2016 granting restitution of conjugal rights in favour of the husband, submits that owing to the subsequent events, the husband has remarried and do not want to press the claim in O.P.No.78/2016. In view of the fact that the husband has re- married, the judgment and decree passed in O.P.No.78/2016 would not survive. Appeal stands disposed of in the aforementioned terms. AMIT RAWAL C.S.SUDHA ak

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial