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.

Sunitha vs Prathapan

Sunitha vs Prathapan

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Orders Decided Jul 29, 2021
~1 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1656623

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 Orders High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
RPFC/150/2021

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Sunitha

Respondent

Prathapan

Excerpt

in the high court of kerala at ernakulampresent the honourable mr. justice p.somarajan thursday, the 29th day of july 2021 / 7th sravana, 1943 against the order issued by the family court, ernakulam in i.a.no.2731/2021 in o.p.no.1381/2021 dated 09.07.2021. revision petitioner: sunitha, aged 40 years, w/o.prathapan, by adv.smt.t.b.mini respondent: prathapan, by advs.sri.k.r.vinod sri.m.s.letha this rev.petition(family court) having come up for admission on 29.07.2021, the court on the same day delivered the following: -2-orderthe revision is against the interlocutory order passed in a civilsuit, i.e., interim order of injunction restraining the petitioner herein from interfering with a shop room scheduled. the revision will not lie by virtue of operation of section 19(5) of the family court act. the legal position was very much settled by this court in baiju v. valsala [2006 khc 1039]. hence the learned counsel for the petitioner sought permission to withdraw the revision petition without prejudice to the right to exhaust the remedy available as per lex fori and lex loci. hence permission is granted.hence this r.p.(fc) is dismissed as withdrawn. sd/- p.somarajan judge bpr

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.SOMARAJAN THURSDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF JULY 2021 / 7TH SRAVANA, 1943 AGAINST THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE FAMILY COURT, ERNAKULAM IN I.A.NO.2731/2021 IN O.P.NO.1381/2021 DATED 09.07.2021. REVISION PETITIONER: SUNITHA, AGED 40 YEARS, W/O.PRATHAPAN, BY ADV.SMT.T.B.MINI RESPONDENT: PRATHAPAN, BY ADVS.SRI.K.R.VINOD SRI.M.S.LETHA THIS REV.PETITION(FAMILY COURT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29.07.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: -2-

ORDER

The revision is against the interlocutory order passed in a civil

suit, i.e., interim order of injunction restraining the petitioner herein from interfering with a shop room scheduled. The revision will not lie by virtue of operation of Section 19(5) of the Family Court Act. The legal position was very much settled by this Court in Baiju v. Valsala [2006 KHC 1039]. Hence the learned counsel for the petitioner sought permission to withdraw the revision petition without prejudice to the right to exhaust the remedy available as per lex fori and lex loci. Hence permission is granted.

Hence this R.P.(FC) is dismissed as withdrawn. Sd/- P.SOMARAJAN JUDGE bpr

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial