Back
K.RAMAKRISHNAN
K. C. ABRAHAM S/O. CHERIAN – Appellant
Versus
LEENA GEORGE – Respondent
The High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam (K. RAMAKRISHNAN, J.) ordered in favour of the father (first revision petitioner K.C. Abraham).
In C.R.P. No. 241 of 2014, the father (along with the second revision petitioner) challenged the Sub Court's order in O.S. 85/2012, which had upheld its jurisdiction over the partition suit filed by the respondent (Leena George, claiming widow status of deceased Reji K. Abraham). The High Court allowed the revision, set aside the Sub Court's finding on jurisdiction [15000373590002][15000373590024] (!) , held that the Family Court has exclusive jurisdiction under Sections 7 and 8 of the Family Courts Act (due to disputes over matrimonial status and property rights linked to the marriage) [15000373590008][15000373590009][15000373590023] (!) , and directed the Sub Court, Muvattupuzha, to immediately transfer O.S. 85/2012 to the Family Court, Muvattupuzha (or appropriate Family Court) under Section 8 (!) (!) (!) . This favoured the father's position that the civil court lacked jurisdiction.
1. The above revision has been filed by the defendants in O.S. 85/2012 on the file of the Sub Court, Muvattupuzha against the order in I.A. 1326/2012 in O.S. 85/2012 in that court under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
2. The suit was filed by the respondent herein as O.S. 85/2012 on the file of the Sub Court, Muvattupuzha for partition of the plaint schedule properties. It is alleged in the plaint that respondent herein is the wife of Sri. Reji K. Abraham, who is the son of the first revision petitioner and brother of the second revision petitioner. The respondent married Sri. Reji K. Abraham on 31.01.1994. Due to some misunderstanding between them, they started residing separately and she filed O.P. 206/2001 before this court for dissolution of marriage and during the pendency of that proceedings, the respondent and the said Reji K. Abraham filed joint petition for divorce under Section 10A of Indian Divorce Act. This court passed a decree rule nisi. Thereafter respondent married a widower by name Biju Varghese on 26.08.2002, who was having a child. After sometime, there was some difference of opinion arose between the respondent and the said Biju Varghese, she f
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
