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

2015 Supreme(Online)(KER) 10518

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
SACHIN NARAYANA PILLAI @ SACHIN VARGHESE – Appellant
Versus
ANNU SUSAN GEORGE – Respondent
OP (FAMILY COURT) 395/2015



IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM

&

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MARY JOSEPH

MONDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF AUGUST 2015/9TH BHADRA, 1937

OP (FC).No. 395 of 2015 (R)

----------------------------

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN OP 1775/2014 of FAMILY

COURT,ERNAKULAM DATED 02-02-2015

PETITIONER(S)/RESPONDENT:

--------------------------

SACHIN NARAYANA PILLAI AGED 39 YEARS

S/O.LATE NARAYANA PILLAI, DUKES 13 C

SKYLINE IMPERIAL GARDENS

JAWAHARLAL NEHRU INTERNATIONAL STADIUM ROAD

PALARIVATTOM

KOCHI-682025. OFFICE ADDRESS AT: RIGHT SERVE SOLUTIONS

TRIVENT COURT, K.P.VALLON ROAD, KADAVANTHRA

KOCHI-682020.

BY ADVS.SRI.SUNIL NAIR PALAKKAT

SRI.K.N.ABHILASH

RESPONDENT(S)/PETITIONER:

--------------------------------------------------

ANNU SUSAN GEORGE, AGED 32 YEARS

D/O.DR.GEORGE VARGHESE, 'NADUVILADATH HOUSE

MUTTAMBALAM P.O., KANJIKUZHI, KOTTAYAM-686004.

THIS OP (FAMILY COURT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31-

08-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

OP (FC).No. 395 of 2015 (R)

----------------------------

APPENDIX

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

-------------------------------------

EXHIBIT-P1: TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DTED 20/09/14 IN OP.1775/14

ON THE FILE OF FAMILY COURT, ERNAKULAM.

EXHIBIT-P2: TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION O.3822/14 IN O.P.1775/14 ON

THE FILE OF FAMILY COURT ERNAKULAM DATED 31/3/15 SUBMTTED BY THE

PETITIONER.

EXHIBIT-P3: TRUE COPY OF THE MEDICAL REPORT ISSUED BY DR.S.D.SINGH

OF THE KIMS HOSPITAL, COCHIN DATED 12/1/2015.

EXHIBIT-P4: THE TYPE WRITTEN COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 2/2/15 IN

O.P.1775/14 OF FAMILY COURT ERNAKULAM.

EXHIBIT-P5:THE TRUE COPY OF THE PSYCHIATRICT REPORT SUBMITTED BY

DR.C.J.JOHN DATED 09.04.2015.

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS

---------------------------------------

NIL

TRUE COPYT

PS TO JUDGE

C.K.ABDUL REHIM & MARY JOSEPH, JJ.

-----------------------------------------

OP(FC) No. 395 of 2015

----------------------------------------

Dated this the 31st day of August, 2015

JUDGMENT

Abdul Rehim,J.

In this original petition filed under Article 227 of the

Constitution of India, the petitioner is seeking interference of this

court to set aside Ext.P4 order of the Family Court, Ernakulam in

OP.No.1775/14, and also to declare that Ext.P5 psychiatric report

submitted before the Family Court in the said case as illegal and

arbitrary, by invoking its supervisory jurisdiction.

2. The petitioner and the respondent herein are husband

and wife. Marriage took place in the year 2010. The parties

belonged to different religion and the marriage was solemnised

after the petitioner had converted into Christianity. Two issues

were born out of the wedlock. The respondent filed

OP.No.1775/14 seeking dissolution of the marriage, alleging

cruelty on the part of the petitioner. The said petition was

resisted inter alia contending that, the respondent is suffering

OP(FC)395/2015

2

from psychological disorders. It is stated in this original petition

that, the Family Court while considering the matter had ordered

for psychiatric evaluation of the respondent by Dr. S.D.Singh,

KIMS Hospital, Ernakulam. Ext.P3 is the Medical Report issued

by the said Doctor, on 12.1.2015. In Ext.P4 order the Family

Court again directed the respondent herein to go for a

psychiatric counselling before Doctor C.J.John, Medical Trust

Hospital, Ernakulam and to get a report from the said Doctor.

Accordingly the respondent appeared before the said Doctor and

after his evaluation Ext.P5 report was submitted before the

Family Court. It is pointed out by the petitioner that Exts. P3 and

P5 reports are contradictory in nature. It is contended that the

Family Court went highly erred in calling for a 2nd report without

setting aside Ext.P3 report. Hence the petitioner is approaching

this court aggrieved by Ext.P4 order and the consequential

Medical Report obtained

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
whatsapp-icon Back to top