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

ANIL K. NARENDRAN, P. G. AJITHKUMAR
Neethu Jagdish – Appellant
Versus
Manumohan Mani – Respondent


Counsel for the Parties:
For the Petitioner:A. Muhammed Musthafa and R.K. Asha, Advocates

JUDGMENT

Anil K. Narendran, J.—The petitioner filed O.P.No.1159 of 2018 on the file of the Family Court, Palakkad, under Section 13(1)(i)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, against the respondent herein-husband, seeking a decree of divorce to dissolve the marriage solemnised between them on 20.03.2009 at Sree Krishna Temple, Guruvayur. The petitioner-wife filed I.A.No.3 of 2022 (Ext.P3) before the Family Court, seeking time-bound disposal of O.P.No.1159 of 2018. In that interlocutory application, the Family Court passed an order dated 13.09.2022, which is placed on record as Ext.P5, along with I.A.No.1 of 2023. The said order reads thus;

“Petition allowed and the case will be disposed of at the earliest.”

The petitioner has filed this original petition, invoking the supervisory jurisdiction of this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, seeking an order directing the Family Court, Palakkad to dispose of O.P.No.1159 of 2018 (Ext.P1) within a time frame to be fixed by this Court or in the alternative an order directing the Family Court to reconsider Ext.P3 interlocutory application, by fixing a time limit for disposal of the said original petition.

2. Heard the lea

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