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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 7796

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, M.B. SNEHALATHA, JJ
JOHNS J MANGATTU – Appellant
Versus
DR. ASHA BABU – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SHRI.LEO GEORGE

Devan Ramachandran, J.

It is conceded at the bar by the learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri. Leo George, that the issues in this case have already been adverted to and answered by this bench in the judgment in OP(FC)No.495 of 2025. He was, therefore, gracious enough to add that his client will be satisfied if the directions in the said judgment are made specifically applicable to this case also.

2. We have no doubt that in the judgment in OP(FC)No.495 of 2025, we had even taken note of the fact of the petitioner having filed a fresh Original Petition – namely this one - before us. However, this Original Petition, was not listed before us only on account of technical reasons, which have now been cured.

In the above circumstances, we dispose of this Original Petition in terms of our observations, holdings, findings, and directions in the judgment in OP(FC)No.495 of 2025 dated 19th September 2025.

Sd/-

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 telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top