Sulochanan vs Prabha

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Apr 06, 2022

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1442955

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

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1442955
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr. Justice a.Muhamed Mustaque,Honourable Mrs. Justice Sophy Thomas
Decided On: Apr 06, 2022
Case Number: OP (FC)/30/2022

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Sulochanan

Respondent

Prabha

Excerpt

.....refused to re-open the evidence to mark certain documents.2. learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, he had to engage a new counsel as his earlier counsel did not produce the documents which were entrusted to him. the family court dismissed the application stating that, this is to fill up lacuna of the evidence already adduced.3. having considered the facts and circumstances,we are of the view that, for the limited purpose of marking the documents, the evidence can be reopened and the petitioner can be examined and all the documents can be received on evidence subject to proof and to the limited extent of proving the documents, the petitioner can be allowed to be re-examined. it is made clear that, the re-examination and marking of the documents is confined only to the aspects referred as above. the respondent also is permitted to cross examine him relating to the aspects as above. the original petition is disposed of as above. sd/- a.muhamed mustaque, judge sd/- sophy thomas, judge as appendix of op (fc) 30/2022 petitioner exhibits:exhibit p1 true copy of the op(hma) 515/2015 before exhibit p2 true copy of the op(g&w) 516/2015 before exhibit p3 true copy of the op(hma) 517/2015 before exhibit p4 true copy of the op 518/2015 before exhibit p5 true copy of the op 450/2015 beforefamily court thiruvalla. exhibit p6 true copy of the op 536/2015 before family court thiruvalla.exhibit p7 true copy of the op 161/2017 before exhibit p8 true copy of the op 162/2017 before exhibit p9 true copy of the op 101/2021 before exhibit p10 true copy of the list of document dated21.10.2020 before family court exhibit p11 true copy of the affidavit and petition in i.a.no.7/2021 before family court exhibit p12 true copy of the order in i.a.no.7/2021 dated 20.09.2021 before family court

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SOPHY THOMAS WEDNESDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF APRIL 2022 / 16TH CHAITHRA, 1944 AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 20.09.2021 IN I.A.NO.7/2021 IN OPHMA PETITIONER/PETITIONER/MAIN PETITIONER: SULOCHANAN, AGED 58 YEARS S/O. LATE GOVINDAN ACHARI, PARVATHY SADANAM, THAZAKKARA POST, ALAPPEY DISTRICT - 690 102. BY ADV SREEHARI INDUKALADHARAN RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/MAIN RESPONDENT:
PRABHA, AGED 44 YEARS D/O. MEENAKSHI AMMA, PALATHITTA VEETTIL, PODIYADI, THIRUVALLA POST, ALEPPEY - 689 101., REPRESENTED BY POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER MOTHER MEENAKSHI AMMA, AGED 68, RESIDING AT KAILASAM (PALATHITTA THEKKETHIL), PADINJATTUM MURI, PODIYADI P.O., NEDUMPRAM VILLAGE, THIRUVALLA TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, KERALA STATE. BY ADV K.N.RADHAKRISHNAN(THIRUVALLA) THIS OP (FAMILY COURT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06.04.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

J U D G M E N T

A.Muhamed Mustaque, J.

This original petition was filed as the Family Court refused to re-open the evidence to mark certain documents.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, he had to engage a new counsel as his earlier counsel did not produce the documents which were entrusted to him. The Family Court dismissed the application stating that, this is to fill up lacuna of the evidence already adduced.

3. Having considered the facts and circumstances,

we are of the view that, for the limited purpose of marking the documents, the evidence can be reopened and the petitioner can be examined and all the documents can be received on evidence subject to proof and to the limited extent of proving the documents, the petitioner can be allowed to be re-examined. It is made clear that, the re-examination and marking of the documents is confined only to the aspects referred as above. The respondent also is permitted to cross examine him relating to the aspects as above. The original petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, JUDGE Sd/- SOPHY THOMAS, JUDGE AS APPENDIX OF OP (FC) 30/2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1         TRUE COPY OF THE OP(HMA) 515/2015 BEFORE
EXHIBIT P2         TRUE COPY OF THE OP(G&W) 516/2015 BEFORE
EXHIBIT P3         TRUE COPY OF THE OP(HMA) 517/2015 BEFORE
EXHIBIT P4         TRUE COPY OF THE OP 518/2015 BEFORE
EXHIBIT P5         TRUE COPY OF THE OP 450/2015 BEFORE

FAMILY COURT THIRUVALLA. EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE OP 536/2015 BEFORE FAMILY COURT THIRUVALLA.

EXHIBIT P7         TRUE COPY OF THE OP 161/2017 BEFORE
EXHIBIT P8         TRUE COPY OF THE OP 162/2017 BEFORE
EXHIBIT P9         TRUE COPY OF THE OP 101/2021 BEFORE
EXHIBIT P10        TRUE COPY OF THE LIST OF DOCUMENT DATED

21.10.2020 BEFORE FAMILY COURT EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT AND PETITION IN I.A.NO.7/2021 BEFORE FAMILY COURT EXHIBIT P12 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN I.A.NO.7/2021 DATED 20.09.2021 BEFORE FAMILY COURT

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2022 Same Parties Sulochanan vs Prabha Same Judge Honourable Mr. Justice a.Muhamed Mustaque,Honourable Mrs. Jus...