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.

Abdulrahman vs Hydrali

Abdulrahman vs Hydrali

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Jun 28, 2019
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1869874

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(C)/547/2019

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Abdulrahman

Respondent

Hydrali

Excerpt

.....respondent: hydrali, aged 56 years, s/o bukhari musaliyar, vadakethil veettil, arakurussi amosam, perimbadari desom, mannarkkad taluk, palakkad district. sri.sajan vargheese k. sri.jophy pothen kandankary sri.liju. m.p this op (civil) having come up for admission on 28.06.2019, the court on the same day passed the following:judgmentthe grievance of the petitioner herein is that though he has filed ext.p4 application for condonation of delay, it has not been taken up by the appellate court. it is further submitted, that at present there is no sitting in that court. however, the respondent is proceeding with ext.p2 final decree application.2. having considered the entire facts, i aminclined to dispose of original petition itself with a direction to the lower appellate court or the judge in charge, to take up and consider ext.p4 application, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of two months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment. passing of the final decree will remain deferred during the above period. sd/- sunil thomas judge vpk appendix petitioner's exhibits: exhibit p1 the true copy of the judgment in o.s.no.149/2014 on the file of munsiff- exhibit p2 the true copy of the fdi.a no.964/2017 in os no.149/2014 on the file of munsiff- exhibit p3 the true copy of the appeal numbered as no.16/2018 on the file of sub court, exhibit p4 the true copy of the i.a.no.561 of 2018. exhibit p5 the true copy of the i.a.no.1569 of 2018 in a.s.no.16/2018 on the file of sub court, // true copy // pa to judge vpk

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS FRIDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF JUNE 2019 / 7TH ASHADHA, 1941 AS 16/2018 of SUB COURT, OTTAPPALAM, PALAKKAD, AGAINST THE PROCEEDINGS IN FDIA NO.964/2017 IN OS 149/2014 of MUNSIFF MAGISTRATE COURT,MANNARKAD PETITIONER: ABDULRAHMAN, AGED 58 YEARS, S/O. BUKHARI MUSALIYAR, MALEMURIYIL VADAKETHIL VEETTIL, THENKARA AMOSAM DESOM, MANNARAKKAD TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. SRI.K.B.ARUNKUMAR SRI.RANJIT BABU RESPONDENT: HYDRALI, AGED 56 YEARS, S/O BUKHARI MUSALIYAR, VADAKETHIL VEETTIL, ARAKURUSSI AMOSAM, PERIMBADARI DESOM, MANNARKKAD TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. SRI.SAJAN VARGHEESE K. SRI.JOPHY POTHEN KANDANKARY SRI.LIJU. M.P THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28.06.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

The grievance of the petitioner herein is that though he has filed Ext.P4 application for condonation of delay, it has not been taken up by the Appellate Court. It is further submitted, that at present there is no sitting in that Court. However, the respondent is proceeding with Ext.P2 final decree application.

2. Having considered the entire facts, I am

inclined to dispose of original petition itself with a direction to the Lower Appellate Court or the Judge in charge, to take up and consider Ext.P4 application, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of two months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment. Passing of the final decree will remain deferred during the above period. Sd/- SUNIL THOMAS JUDGE VPK APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN O.S.NO.149/2014 ON THE FILE OF MUNSIFF- EXHIBIT P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE FDI.A NO.964/2017 IN OS NO.149/2014 ON THE FILE OF MUNSIFF- EXHIBIT P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL NUMBERED AS NO.16/2018 ON THE FILE OF SUB COURT, EXHIBIT P4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE I.A.NO.561 OF 2018. EXHIBIT P5 THE TRUE COPY OF THE I.A.NO.1569 OF 2018 IN A.S.NO.16/2018 ON THE FILE OF SUB COURT, // TRUE COPY // PA TO JUDGE VPK

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial