Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, M.B. SNEHALATHA, JJ
ROSHITH RAMAKRISHNAN – Appellant
Versus
SIVA LAKSHMI. M.U. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner's challenge to family court's ex parte decree due to service issues. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. response detailing service failure and resulting misunderstandings. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 3. importance of merits in judicial decisions over procedural missteps. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 4. directive for family court to hear ia 5/2025 on merits. (Para 14) |
Devan Ramachandran , J.
The petitioner challenges Ext.P11 order of the learned Family Court, Kottayam at Ettumanoor, asserting that it has been issued on wrong factual basis and adverting to incorrect contentions and assertions.
2. Compendiously, the petitioner suffered an ex parte decree in OP No.1373/2023 filed by the respondent; and he filed IA No.5/2025 to have the same set aside, invoking the provisions of Order IX Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC). The learned Court issued notice on this application, but on the envelope, the endorsement was “RP 5/2025 (OP 1373/2023)” (sic). For some reason, this envelope was not received by the respondent and she says that she and her power of attorney holder were abroad; but the postal endorsement on it appears to be “refused” (sic).
3. The learned Court, there
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
