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.

Melwin Mathew vs Akshara (Minor)

Melwin Mathew vs Akshara (Minor)

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Feb 26, 2021
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1607824

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
OP (FC)/143/2021

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Melwin Mathew

Respondent

Akshara (Minor)

Excerpt

in the high court of kerala at ernakulampresent the honourable mr. justice a.muhamed mustaque & the honourable mr.justice dr. kauser edappagath friday, the 26th day of february 2021 / 7th phalguna, 1942 against the order/judgment in op 1470/2018 of family court,thrissur petitioner:melwin mathew, s/o.chekkaparambil mathew, monadi desom, vellikulangara village chalakkudy taluk rep.by his power attorney holder and father mr.mathew aged 65 years s/o.chekkamparambil devassy. by advs. sri.sinu.g.nath shri.tony george thomas smt.jyothy v.s. smt. akshara shyam shri.appu t.s. respondents: 1 akshara (minor), aged 17 years, d/o.rathika, thrissur taluk, rep.by guardian and mother rathika, aged 40 yrs, d/o.parameshwaran, thrissur taluk, pin 680 651. 2 raju, s/o.unnikrishnan nair, palackal house, chunkal desom, mattathur p.o., mattathur village, thrissur dist. pin 680 684. this op (family court) having come up for admission on 26.02.2021, the court on the same day delivered the following: ..2..judgmentdated this the 26th day of february 2021 a.muhamed mustaque, j the original petition is dismissed, as it is not maintainable, with liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal, if the petitioner desires to do so as against the impugned order. a.muhamed mustaque kauser edappagath pr ..3.. appendix petitioner's exhibits: exhibit p1 true copy of order of the hon'ble family court thrissur in i.a.no.2984/2019 in op no.1470/2018 dtd.12.3.2020 exhibit p2 true copy of the i.a.2984/2019 in o.p.no.1470/2018. exhibit p3 true copy of the sale deed no.1648/2018 dtd. 14.9.2018 of kodali exhibit p4 true copy of the sale deed no.1689/2018 dtd. 28.11.2018 of kodali exhibit p5 true copy of the sale deed no.381 of 2011 dtd. 9.2.2011 of kodali sro. exhibit p6 true copy of agreement for sale dt. exhibit p7 true copy of receipt showing the subsequent payment of rs.4,00,000/-

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH FRIDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 7TH PHALGUNA, 1942 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN OP 1470/2018 OF FAMILY COURT,THRISSUR PETITIONER:

MELWIN MATHEW, S/O.CHEKKAPARAMBIL MATHEW, MONADI DESOM, VELLIKULANGARA VILLAGE CHALAKKUDY TALUK REP.BY HIS POWER ATTORNEY HOLDER AND FATHER MR.MATHEW AGED 65 YEARS S/O.CHEKKAMPARAMBIL DEVASSY. BY ADVS. SRI.SINU.G.NATH SHRI.TONY GEORGE THOMAS SMT.JYOTHY V.S. SMT. AKSHARA SHYAM SHRI.APPU T.S. RESPONDENTS: 1 AKSHARA (MINOR), AGED 17 YEARS, D/O.RATHIKA, THRISSUR TALUK, REP.BY GUARDIAN AND MOTHER RATHIKA, AGED 40 YRS, D/O.PARAMESHWARAN, THRISSUR TALUK, PIN 680 651. 2 RAJU, S/O.UNNIKRISHNAN NAIR, PALACKAL HOUSE, CHUNKAL DESOM, MATTATHUR P.O., MATTATHUR VILLAGE, THRISSUR DIST. PIN 680 684. THIS OP (FAMILY COURT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ..2..

JUDGMENT

Dated this the 26th day of February 2021 A.Muhamed Mustaque, J The original petition is dismissed, as it is not maintainable, with liberty to the petitioner to file an appeal, if the petitioner desires to do so as against the impugned order. A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH PR ..3.. APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF ORDER OF THE HON'BLE FAMILY COURT THRISSUR IN I.A.NO.2984/2019 IN OP NO.1470/2018 DTD.12.3.2020 EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE I.A.2984/2019 IN O.P.NO.1470/2018. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.1648/2018 DTD. 14.9.2018 OF KODALI EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.1689/2018 DTD. 28.11.2018 OF KODALI EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.381 OF 2011 DTD. 9.2.2011 OF KODALI SRO. EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF AGREEMENT FOR SALE DT. EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF RECEIPT SHOWING THE SUBSEQUENT PAYMENT OF RS.4,00,000/-

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial