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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 28761

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A., K. V. JAYAKUMAR, JJ
PRAMITH P – Appellant
Versus
REENA KUMARI – Respondent
OP (FC) NO. 286 OF 2026 | O.P No.47/2020



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.M.R.SASITH

Court directs consideration of pending evidence reopening application before final judgment.

Headnote:The Family Court closed petitioner's evidence without opportunity due to health issues. Petitioner filed application (Ext.P3, I.A.No.2/2026) for reopening evidence, pending consideration. High Court directed Family Court to decide application before final orders. Issues framed as need for direction to consider reopening application prior to judgment. Ratio: Proper to decide pending reopening application before finalizing proceedings to ensure fairness. Original Petition disposed directing Family Court to consider I.A.No.2/2026 within one month after hearing parties.

Table of Content
1. petitioner's evidence closed without opportunity due to health. (Para 2)

ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A., J.

The petitioner is the 1st respondent in O.P No.47/2020 on the files of the Family Court, Pathanamthitta, which was filed by the 1st respondent herein for recovery of gold ornaments and money from the petitioner and the 2nd respondent herein.

2. The grievance of the petitioner is that, when the matter came up for consideration on 17.02.2026, the evidence of the petitioner was closed without providing an opportunity to the petitioner. According to the petitioner, he could not attend the said hearing due to some health issues, and the evidence of the petitioner was closed in such circumstances. Immediately thereafter, the petitioner submitted Ext.P3, which is I.A.No.2/2026, for reopening the evidence, which is now pending consideration. According to the petitioner, before passing an order in Ext.P3, the proceedings in the Original Petition is likely to be completed as the matter is now posted for final hearing. At this juncture, this Original Petition is submitted by the petitioner seeking for a direction to the Family Court, Pathanamthitta, to consider Ext.P3 application submitted by the petitioner. Since the relief sought by the petitioner is consideration of Ext.P3 application, we are of the view that the Original Petition can be disposed of without issuing notice to the respondents. Since the application of the petitioner for reopening of the evidence is now pending consideration, it is only proper that a decision thereon be taken by the Family Court, before final orders are passed in the Original Petition.

In such circumstances, this Original Petition is disposed of directing the Family Court, Pathanamthitta, to consider I.A.No.2/2026 in O.P.No.47/2020, after hearing all the parties and pass appropriate orders within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. It is further ordered that the final order in the Original Petition shall be passed only after the order in Ext.P3 is passed.

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 Back to top