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

2024 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 90517

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
KEERTHI ARAVIND – Appellant
Versus
ANIL KUMAR – Respondent
Mat.Appeal 763/2018



-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN &

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.B. SNEHALATHA WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2024 / 24TH ASWINA, 1946 MAT.APPEAL NO. 763 OF 2018 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 16.02.2018 IN OP NO.1349 OF 2013 OF FAMILY COURT, MAVELIKKARA APPELLANT:

KEERTHI ARAVIND, D/O ARAVINDAKSHAN PILLAI, AGED 34, SAVITHRI NIVAS, KARIMULACKAL, KOMALLOOR P.O., CHUNAKKARA VILLAGE, MAVELIKKARA TALUK.

BY ADV SRI.K.R.SUNIL RESPONDENTS:

1 ANIL KUMAR AGED 44 YEARS S/O.KUTTAPPA PANICKER, AGED 44.HARI MANDIRAM, (VELOOR), VALIYAKULANGARA P.O., KULANJIKARAZHMA, MAVELIKARA.

2 AMMINI AMMA @ KARTHIYAYANI AMMA AGED 70, HARI MANDIRAM, (VELOOR), VALIYAKULANGARA P.O., KULANJIKARAZHMA, MAVELIKARA.

3 KUTTAPPA PANICKER, AGED 80 YEARS HARI MANDIRAM, (VELOOR), VALIYAKULANGARA P.O., KULANJIKARAZHMA, MAVELIKARA.

4 JAYA, DO.AMMINIAMMA AGED 45 YEARS MANOJ BHAVAN, PALLIPPAD VILLAGE.

5 LEKHA AGED 40 YEARS MAVILA PADEETTATHI, VALIYAKULANGARA, KULANJIKARAZHMA, MAVELIKARA.

-

BY ADVS.

RINNY STEPHEN CHAMAPARAMPIL SRI.IYPE JOSEPH VARUGHESE CHERIAN SRI.V.MANOJ KUMAR S.S.JAYAKALA M.A.AUGUSTINE ASHA ELIZABETH MATHEW(K/1557/2003)

NEENA ELISABATH ANTONY(K/000278/2024)

THIS MATRIMONIAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16.10.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

-

JUDGMENT Sri.K.R.Sunil - the learned counsel for the appellant, submitted that his client does not intend to prosecute this appeal because, she is satisfied with the directions. He, however, prayed that the interim order of this Court be allowed to continue for a few more days, so that his client can then move the learned Family Court for appropriate orders.

2. We notice that there is no appearance for the respondents, nor is he personally present today.

3. However, since the petitioner seeks to withdraw this appeal, we see no reason not to allow it.

In the afore circumstances, this appeal is dismissed as having been withdrawn; however, ordering that the interim order granted by this Court will continue to be in effect for a further period of 14 days from today.

-

Sd/-

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE Sd/-

M.B. SNEHALATHA JUDGE SAS APPENDIX OF MAT.APPEAL NO. 763 OF 201 8 PETITIONERS’ EXHIBITS ANNEXURE A1 THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE ORDER DATED

-

16.02.2018 IN O.P.NO.1349/2013 OF THE FAMILY COURT, MAVELIKKARA.

ANNEXURE A2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED

21.03.2019 IN WP(C) NO.7692/2019.

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 Back to top