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.

Kurian vs Julie

Kurian vs JULIE

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Nov 09, 2023
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1366234

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
RPFC/401/2014

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Kurian

Respondent

JULIE

Excerpt

in the high court of kerala at ernakulampresent the honourable mr.justice c.s.dias thursday, the 9th day of november 2023 / 18th karthika, 1945 against the order/judgment mc 393/2012 of family court,thrissur revision petitioner/s: kurian aged 64 years, kodiyath house, s/o sakkariya, chiyyaram p.o., thrissur district pin 680026. by adv sri.c.a.anoop respondent/s: 1 julie, aged 36 years w/o paulson, kizhakoodan(h), p.o.thalore, thrissur district, pin 680030 2 linta, aged 30 years w/o.sajeevan,mullayil(h),nattika.p.o,thrissur district,pin-680566. 3 dayana, aged 25 years w/o.shijo,arikkadan(h),muriyad(p.o),thrissur district,pin-680683. by advs. sri.nireesh mathew this rev.petition(family court) having come up for admission on 09.11.2023, the court on the same day delivered the following: (dated this the 9th day of november, 2023)orderthe revision petition is filed questioning the legality andcorrectness of the order in m.c.no.393/2012 of the family court, thrissur dismissing the application filed by the revision petitioner under section 125 of the code of criminal procedure against his children for monthly maintenance allowance. the revision petitioner was the applicant and the respondents were the respondents before the family court.2. today, when the revision petition was taken up for admission, the learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner, sri.c.a.anoop, submitted that the revision petitioner is no more. there are no other near relatives to come on record. hence, the revision petition may be dismissed as abated. the said submission is recorded. resultantly, the revision petition is dismissed as abated. sd/- c.s.dias judge rkc/09.11.23

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS THURSDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2023 / 18TH KARTHIKA, 1945 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT MC 393/2012 OF FAMILY COURT,THRISSUR REVISION PETITIONER/S: KURIAN AGED 64 YEARS, KODIYATH HOUSE, S/O SAKKARIYA, CHIYYARAM P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT PIN 680026. BY ADV SRI.C.A.ANOOP RESPONDENT/S: 1 JULIE, AGED 36 YEARS W/O PAULSON, KIZHAKOODAN(H), P.O.THALORE, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN 680030 2 LINTA, AGED 30 YEARS W/O.SAJEEVAN,MULLAYIL(H),NATTIKA.P.O,THRISSUR DISTRICT,PIN-680566. 3 DAYANA, AGED 25 YEARS W/O.SHIJO,ARIKKADAN(H),MURIYAD(P.O),THRISSUR DISTRICT,PIN-680683. BY ADVS. SRI.NIREESH MATHEW THIS REV.PETITION(FAMILY COURT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09.11.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: (Dated this the 9th day of November, 2023)

ORDER

The revision petition is filed questioning the legality and

correctness of the order in M.C.No.393/2012 of the Family Court, Thrissur dismissing the application filed by the revision petitioner under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure against his children for monthly maintenance allowance. The revision petitioner was the applicant and the respondents were the respondents before the Family Court.

2. Today, when the revision petition was taken up for admission, the learned Counsel appearing for the revision petitioner, Sri.C.A.Anoop, submitted that the revision petitioner is no more. There are no other near relatives to come on record. Hence, the revision petition may be dismissed as abated. The said submission is recorded. Resultantly, the revision petition is dismissed as abated. Sd/- C.S.DIAS JUDGE rkc/09.11.23

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial