Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, M.B. SNEHALATHA, JJ
JINCY GEORGE – Appellant
Versus
JOBIN BABU – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to ruling on evidence presentation. (Para 1) |
| 2. incapacity claimed in presenting evidence. (Para 2) |
| 3. court upholds procedural rules; relaxation request directed to family court. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 4. petition dismissed; further applications can be made. (Para 5) |
Devan Ramachandran , J.
The petitioner challenges Ext.P5 order, but concedes that all which is ordered therein is that her plea for adducing evidence through online platform shall be done as per the Kerala Electronic Video Linkage Rules (for short “Rules”).
2. Sri.S.Saju - appearing for the petitioner, submitted that her client is now incapacitated from offering evidence as per the “Rules” because, she is in a place in France, which will not permit her to act fully as per its ambit. He prayed that, therefore, this Court direct the learned Family Court to relax the “Rules” appropriately, so that his client can present their evidence.
3. We are afraid that we cannot intervene in this matter in the manner now requested by Sri.S.Saju since we find nothing in error in Ext.P5, it only directing the petitioner to tender evidence as per the “Rules”.
4. When the “Rules” are in force, no Court can say that such need
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
