SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

PADMANABHAN
Kunhiraman – Appellant
Versus
Manoj – Respondent


ORDER

Padmanabhan, J. - Kunhiraman is a wealthy middle-aged eligible bachelor. Vilasini is his neighbour. She is a young spinster working as agent of an insurance company. Vilasini became pregnant and gave birth to Manoj. Pregnancy and delivery were cleverly concealed by her because she was unmarried. Delivery was in the paramba, where the child was abandoned. Matter came to the notice of the police. She was prosecuted, but acquitted. Now the child is happily living with her. In the birth register, Kunhiraman ' s name appeared as father on her information. He objected and got his name removed. On behalf of Manoj, she filed M.C. No. .17 of 1988, before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Thalasserry against Kunhiraman under section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for getting maintenance. Kunhiraman denied paternity. Chief Judicial Magistrate found him to be the putative father and awarded maintenance at the monthly rate of Rs. 500/-. Kunhiraman wants to revise that order.

2. Both Kunhiraman and Vilasini hail from families having good antecedents. In the petition and in the box as P.W. 1 Vilasini said that in her life, she gave sexual access only to Kunhiraman. Kunhiraman denies hav

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top