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

2008 Supreme(Online)(KER) 2071

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
V.RAMKUMAR, J
KUNHAMMU & OTHERS – Appellant
Versus
PROTECTION OFFICER, AND OTHERS – Respondent


Advocates:
SRI.MANSOOR.B.H, SRI.A.D.RAVENDRA PRASAD, CGC

JUDGMENT

In this Writ Petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the husband, husband's second wife, husband's sister and husband's sister's son respectively of the 2nd respondent Aysha challenge Ext.P2 order passed by the J.F.C.M. I, Mannarkkadu in c.M.P. No. 1903 of 2007 which was an application filed by the said Aysha under Sec. 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2003 ('the Act' for short).

2. The leaned counsel appearing for the petitioner's made the following submissions in support of the petition.

Sec. 13 (2) of the Act is unconstitutional and violative of the rights guaranteed under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution and the order is opposed to the principles of natural justice. It confers arbitrary power on the Protection Officer in the matter of serving notice to the respondents . Eventhough Sec. 37 (2)(j) of the Act provides for the prescription of a Form of declaration, to be issued under Section 13 (2) of the said Act, no such Form has been prescribed in the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Rules, 2006 ('the Rules' for short). The Protection Officer had not served notice on the application on the Writ Peti

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