Suresh vs Ganga

Suresh vs GANGA

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Mar 27, 2019

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1896474

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/1896474
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr.Justice a.M.Shaffique,Honourable Mr. Justice Ashok Menon
Decided On: Mar 27, 2019
Case Number: Mat.Appeal/41/2017

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Suresh

Respondent

GANGA

Excerpt

in the high court of kerala at ernakulampresent the honourable mr.justice a.m.shaffique & the honourable mr. justice ashok menon wednesday,the 27th day of march 2019 / 6th chaithra, 1941 mat.appeal.no. 41 of 2017 against the order/judgment in ia nos.1019 & 1020/2015 in op of family court, malappuramappellant/petitioner in ia/1st respondent: suresh, aged 40 years, s/o.narayanan nair, karippamadam house, near kuniyil ambalam, beypore, kozhikode district. sri.p.v.kunhikrishnan sri.p.v.anoop respondent/respondent in the ia/petitioner: ganga aged 33 years, d/o.gopalakrishnan,cholakkattukuzhiyil, vallikkunnu (po), parapanagadi, malappuram district. pin-673 006. sri.arun mathew vadakkan sri.k.p.sudheer this matrimonial appeal having been finally heard on 27.03.2019, the court on the same day delivered the following: mat.appeal 41/2017 -2-judgmentshaffique, j.this mat. appeal is filed by the petitioner in ia nos.1019 and 1020of 2015 in op no.243/2009 on the file of family court, malappuram. the applications were filed to set aside the ex parte decree after condoning the delay of 2460 days. in the affidavits filed in support of the applications, the petitioner stated that he was ill and was unable to prosecute the matter. but, no evidence was adduced to prove the same. the family court, therefore, dismissed those applications. we do not find any ground to interfere with the said order, as no evidence is available to prove that the petitioner was laid up or was incapable of defending his case. there is justification for passing an ex parte decree. that apart, his father had appeared in the case and had defended the matter. under such circumstances, there is no reason why we should interfere with the said order of ex parte decree as against the petitioner. the mat. appeal is dismissed. no costs.a.m.shaffique judge ashok menon jg judge

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON WEDNESDAY,THE 27TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 / 6TH CHAITHRA, 1941 Mat.Appeal.No. 41 of 2017 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN IA NOS.1019 & 1020/2015 IN OP of FAMILY COURT, MALAPPURAM
APPELLANT/PETITIONER IN IA/1ST RESPONDENT: SURESH, AGED 40 YEARS, S/O.NARAYANAN NAIR, KARIPPAMADAM HOUSE, NEAR KUNIYIL AMBALAM, BEYPORE, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. SRI.P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN SRI.P.V.ANOOP RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT IN THE IA/PETITIONER: GANGA AGED 33 YEARS, D/O.GOPALAKRISHNAN,CHOLAKKATTUKUZHIYIL, VALLIKKUNNU (PO), PARAPANAGADI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. PIN-673 006. SRI.ARUN MATHEW VADAKKAN SRI.K.P.SUDHEER THIS MATRIMONIAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27.03.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Mat.Appeal 41/2017 -2-

JUDGMENT

Shaffique, J.

This Mat. Appeal is filed by the petitioner in IA Nos.1019 and 1020

of 2015 in OP No.243/2009 on the file of Family Court, Malappuram. The applications were filed to set aside the ex parte decree after condoning the delay of 2460 days. In the affidavits filed in support of the applications, the petitioner stated that he was ill and was unable to prosecute the matter. But, no evidence was adduced to prove the same. The Family Court, therefore, dismissed those applications. We do not find any ground to interfere with the said order, as no evidence is available to prove that the petitioner was laid up or was incapable of defending his case. There is justification for passing an ex parte decree. That apart, his father had appeared in the case and had defended the matter. Under such circumstances, there is no reason why we should interfere with the said order of ex parte decree as against the petitioner. The Mat. Appeal is dismissed. No costs.

A.M.SHAFFIQUE JUDGE ASHOK MENON jg JUDGE

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2019 Same Parties Suresh vs GANGA Same Judge Honourable Mr.Justice a.M.Shaffique,Honourable Mr. Justice As...