IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, M.B. SNEHALATHA, JJ
RASHIK MON – Appellant
Versus
FEBINA – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to sale proclamation without contesting the family court order. (Para 1) |
| 2. court's requirement for challenging prior orders. (Para 2) |
| 3. relief sought requires direct court action. (Para 3) |
Devan Ramachandran, J.
The petitioners challenge Ext.P5 - sale proclamation, but without challenging the order of the learned Family Court, Malappuram, which settled it.
2. We are afraid that we cannot find favour with the petitioners, even though they say that they want an opportunity to settle the entire decree; alternatively pleading that the amount that they have to pay is only as per an alleged agreement between the parties earlier. This is because, without challenging the order of the learned Family Court proclaiming to sell the property, they could not have filed this petition assailing the sale proclamation. It is well known that, in the orders allowing the sale proclamation, learned Courts would have dealt with every aspect as impelled before it. However, in this case, we are not aware of what exactly went through the Court's mind at the time when the sale proclamation was settled because it is not under challenge.
3. If the petitioners require any relief, either
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.