Ganga vs Ajikumar

GANGA vs Ajikumar

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Jan 18, 2021

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1716343

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/1716343
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr. Justice a.Muhamed Mustaque,Honourable Mr.Justice C.S.Dias
Decided On: Jan 18, 2021
Case Number: OP (FC)/531/2018

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

GANGA

Respondent

Ajikumar

Excerpt

.....p2. the family court, by ext.p4 order dated 10.8.2018 dismissed the application on the ground that the application was belated, as it was filed after the lapse of more than two years after the institution of ext.p1.3. heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel appeariing for the respondent.4. it is an undisputed fact that the respondenthad filed ext.p1 as early as on 28.9.2016. the petitioner filed ext.p2 only on 31.7.2018. ext.p3 application seeking consolidation and joint trial ofexts.p1 and p2 was filed only on 7.8.2018.5. the family court, after considering the pleadings and materials on record, particularly the dates of institution of exts.p1 and p2 and filing of ext.p3, came to the conclusion that ext.p3 application was belatedly filed in order to protract the determination of ext.p1. consequently, ext.p3 application was dismissed by ext. p4 order.6. although notice was issued to the respondentas early as on 28.9.2018, this court declined any interim relief to stay the trial of ext.p1. therefore, at this distance of time, we do not find any ground for the consolidation and joint trial of exts.p1 and p2. perhaps ext.p1 may have been disposed of.7. considering the above findings, we do not find any error or illegality in the findings of the family court in ext.p4 order warranting interference in exercise of the supervisory jurisdiction of this court under article 227 of the constitution of india.the original petition fails and is accordingly dismissed. sd/- a.muhamed mustaque judge sd/- c.s.dias ma judge /true copy/ appendix of op (fc) 531/2018 petitioner's/s exhibits: exhibit p1 copy of the petition for divorce dated 28.09.2016. exhibit p2 copy of the o.p.698/2018 dated 31.07.2018. exhibit p3 copy of i.a.1300/2018 dated 07.08.2018. exhibit p4 certified copy of order in ia.1300/2018.

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS MONDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 28TH POUSHA, AGAINST THE ORDER IN I.A. 1300/2018 IN OP 698/2018 OF FAMILY COURT, ALAPPUZHA PETITIONER/S: GANGA AGED 29 YEARS D/O. MURALI, C.M.C -5, NIKARTHIL VEEDU, KOKKOTHAMANGALAM VILLAGE, CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA - 688 527. BY ADV. SRI.MANU ROY RESPONDENT/S: 1 AJIKUMAR AGED 38 YEARS S/O. KARTHIKEYAN, C.M.C. - 8, CHANIYIL VEEDU, KOKKOTHOMANGALAM VILLAGE, CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA - 688 527. 2 SIBEESH BABU, AGED 26, S/O.BABU, VARYATHU VELI, EZHUPUNNA VILLAGE, PIN-688 548. THIS OP (FAMILY COURT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18.01.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

Dated this the 18th day of January 2021

C.S.Dias, J.

The original petition is filed to set aside Ext.P4

order passed by the Family Court, Alappuzha in O.P.

No.631/2018.

2. The concise case of the petitioner in the original petition is that, she is the 1 st respondent in O.P.

(HMA) 631/2016 (Ext.P1), filed for a decree of divorce

and the petitioner in O.P. 698/2018 (Ext.P2) filed for a decree of restitution of conjugal rights. The petitioner had filed I.A No.1300/2018 (Ext.P3) in Ext.P1 seeking joint trial of Exts.P1 and P2. The Family Court, by Ext.P4 order dated 10.8.2018 dismissed the application on the ground that the application was belated, as it was filed after the lapse of more than two years after the institution of Ext.P1.

3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsel appeariing for the respondent.

4. It is an undisputed fact that the respondent

had    filed Ext.P1 as early as on            28.9.2016.     The
petitioner filed Ext.P2 only on              31.7.2018. Ext.P3
application seeking         consolidation and joint trial of

Exts.P1 and P2 was filed only on 7.8.2018.

5. The Family Court, after considering the pleadings and materials on record, particularly the dates of institution of Exts.P1 and P2 and filing of Ext.P3, came to the conclusion that Ext.P3 application was belatedly filed in order to protract the determination of Ext.P1. Consequently, Ext.P3 application was dismissed by Ext. P4 order.

6. Although notice was issued to the respondent

as early as on 28.9.2018, this Court declined any interim relief to stay the trial of Ext.P1. Therefore, at this distance of time, we do not find any ground for the consolidation and joint trial of Exts.P1 and P2. Perhaps Ext.P1 may have been disposed of.

7. Considering the above findings, we do not find any error or illegality in the findings of the Family Court in Ext.P4 order warranting interference in exercise of the supervisory jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.

The original petition fails and is accordingly dismissed. Sd/- A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE JUDGE Sd/- C.S.DIAS ma JUDGE /True copy/ APPENDIX OF OP (FC) 531/2018 PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF THE PETITION FOR DIVORCE DATED 28.09.2016. EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF THE O.P.698/2018 DATED 31.07.2018. EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF I.A.1300/2018 DATED 07.08.2018. EXHIBIT P4 CERTIFIED COPY OF ORDER IN IA.1300/2018.

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2021 Same Parties GANGA vs Ajikumar Same Judge Honourable Mr. Justice a.Muhamed Mustaque,Honourable Mr.Justi...