Back
2015 Supreme(Online)(KER) 35662
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
C.K. ABDUL REHIM, MARY JOSEPH, JJ
JIJU LUKOSE – Appellant
Versus
SNEHA JOSE – Respondent
OP (FC) 495 2015
SRI.G.KRISHNAKUMAR SMT. PRIYA PA, SRI.E.M.MURUGAN
Family Courts must allow all relevant evidence for fair adjudication, as per Section 14 of the Family Courts Act, 1984.
Headnote:
Family Law - Family Courts Act, 1984 - Sections 14 - The court discussed the acceptance of documents in family court proceedings, emphasizing that the Family Court's discretion should prioritize the effective handling of disputes and allow the introduction of best available evidence.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners challenged a Family Court order dismissing applications to open a Bank Locker and accept additional documents in a case regarding the return of patrimony and gold ornaments valued at Rs.33,25,000, allegedly entrusted to them by the respondent.
Issues: Whether the Family Court erred in dismissing the applications for opening the Bank Locker and accepting additional documents in a patrimonial dispute.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that while the request to open the Bank Locker was irrelevant at that stage, the non-acceptance of all additional documents violated the Family Court's duty to ensure all relevant evidence is considered to ensure justice.
Final Decision: The original petition is allowed in part; the Family Court must accept the additional documents.
J U D G M E N T
C.K. Abdul Rehim, J:
The petitioners herein, who are the respondents in OP No.1699/2012 instituted before the Family Court, Kottayam by the respondent herein, is approaching this court challenging Ext.P12 common order passed by the Family court in IA Nos.1503/2015, 1504/2015, 1505/2015 & 1506/2015. Challenge in this original petition is limited only against the orders passed in IA Nos.1503/2015 &
1504/2015.
2. The suit was instituted against the petitioners herein seeking for return of patrimony and value of gold ornaments amounting to Rs.33,25,000/-, which is alleged to have been entrusted with them and for a declaration of title over an immovable property having an extent of 50 cents along with building and sawmill contained therein. It is the claim of the respondent that her father had given 457 gms.
OP (FC) No.495/2015 -2-
of gold ornaments worth Rs.12.50 lakhs and an amount of Rs.13.75 lakhs in cash and also a gold chain having 34 gms. worth Rs.65,000/-. It is also alleged that another some of Rs.5,00,000/- was paid by the father of the respondent to the petitioners. Hence the suit is filed seeking realization of a total amount of Rs.33,25,000/-.
3. One of the contentions raised by the petitioners herein before the court below is that, certain gold ornaments were entrusted by the respondent to the 2nd petitioner, to keep it the Bank Locker and a list of such gold ornaments entrusted was prepared by the petitioner on her own handwriting. According to the petitioners those ornaments are kept in the Bank Locker maintained with the South Indian Bank. The petitioners have filed IA No.1503/2015 (Ext.P3) seeking for appointment of an Advocate Commissioner to open the Bank Locker and to prepare an inventory of the ornaments and other documents kept in the locker, and also to take photographs of the ornaments kept. The petitioners have also filed Ext.P4, I.A. No.1504/2015 (Ext.P4) seeking to accept a 'list of OP (FC) No.495/2015 -3-
documents' annexed along with that I.A. Averments in the affidavit filed in support is that, the document produced along with I.A could not be filed on any earlier occasion, because a transfer petition seeking for transfer of the case from the Family Court, Kottayam was pending before this court. Therefore it is stated that delay in filing documents was not wilful and the documents need to be accepted in the case.
4. The court below considered the above said two interim applications along with two other petitions and dismissed them through the common order (Ext.P12) which is impugned in this original petition. Being aggrieved by dismissal of IA Nos.1503/2015 & 1504/2015, this original petition is filed by invoking the supervisory jurisdiction vested on this court, under Article 227of the Constitution of India.
5. Evidently, the court below had considered circumstances prevailed in the petitioner prosecuting the case before the Family Court. It is observed that the petitioners have preferred innumerable number of I.As OP (FC) No.495/2015 -4-
before the court below, most of which are totally unnecessary or irrelevant. It is also blamed that the petitioners have approached this court seeking transfer of the case even by making baseless and defamatory allegations against the Family Court and subsequently the said transfer petition was withdrawn by the petitioners themselves. It is also pointed out that trial of the case has already started and the interim applications in question were filed only at a stage when the case was posted for recording evidence of the respondent herein. From the factual matrix revealed, we perfectly agree with the observations contained in the impugned order of the court below. But this court is of the considered opinion that, despite the existence of any such circumstances the present I.As need to be considered on its merits.
6. I.A No.1503/2015 was filed seeking for appointment of an Advocate Commissioner to open the Bank Locker and to make an inventory and to take photograp
