IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, J
PRASOON T – Appellant
Versus
KEERTHANA M – Respondent
J U D G M E N T
This original petition has been filed by the respondent in M.C.No. 98 of 2023 through his power of attorney holder to give a direction to the Family Court, Thalassery to accept the power of attorney and permit him to defend the case.
2. I have heard the power of attorney holder of the petitioner, who appeared in person.
3. I have called for a report from the learned Judge, Family Court, Thalassery, who reported that CMP No. 831 of 2024 filed by the petitioner to allow his power of attorney holder to represent him in the case and CMP 833 of 2024 filed by the power of attorney holder to accept the power of attorney were dismissed for default. Subsequently, the petitioner was set ex-parte and the MC itself was allowed directing the petitioner to pay maintenance to the respondent No.1. In these circumstances, the prayer in this original petition has become infructuous. However, the petitioner shall be at liberty to file an application through his power of attorney holder to set aside the ex-parte order before the Family Court, Thalassery. If such an application is filed, the Familly Court is directed to dispose of the same in accordance with law.
4. The power of attorney
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.