V.V.Jaya vs V.V.Jaya
2021 Latest Caselaw 5135 Ker

RP.No.1017 OF 2017 IN Mat.Appeal. 312/2007


                                                1



                          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                             PRESENT

                           THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE

                                                &

                           THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MARY JOSEPH

        THURSDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 22ND MAGHA,1942

                        RP.No.1017 OF 2017 IN Mat.Appeal. 312/2007

 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN Mat.Appeal 312/2007 DATED 02-12-2015 OF
                      HIGH COURT OF KERALA


REVIEW PETITIONER/RESPONDENT :

                            V.V.JAYA, AGED 42 YEARS,
                            D/O.VARGHESE, PRESENTLY RESIDING
                            SREE, RG 163, KOCHULLOOR, MEDICAL COLLEGE P.O.,
                            THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

                            BY ADV. SMT.P.P.BLESSY MOL

RESPONDENT/APPELLANT :

                            RAJKUMAR NAIR, AGED 46 YEARS,
                            S/O.M.P.RAJESWARAN NAIR,
                            PRESENTLY RESIDING AT ANANDAVILASOM, KUNNUKUZHY,
                            THIRUMULLAVARAM AND ORIGINALLY FROM SREE, RG 163,
                            KOCHULLOOR, MEDICAL COLLEGE P.O.,
                            THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.


                            R1 BY ADV. SRI.M.RAJENDRAN NAIR (THONNALLOOR)
                            R1 BY ADV. SRI.M.RAJENDRAN NAIR THONNALLOOR

THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11.02.2021,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 RP.No.1017 OF 2017 IN Mat.Appeal. 312/2007


                                                2




                                             O R D E R

Shaffique, J.

Today when the above review petition is taken up for

hearing, there is no appearance or representation on behalf

of the petitioner.

2. The learned counsel representing the respondent however

submits that the review petition was filed with a petition to

condone the delay of almost one year and in the meantime

the husband remarried.

3. Taking into consideration all these facts as well, the review

petition is dismissed for non prosecution.

Sd/-

A.M.SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE

sd/-

MARY JOSEPH, JUDGE AMV/11.02.2021 RP.No.1017 OF 2017 IN Mat.Appeal. 312/2007

APPENDIX

PETITIONERS ANNEXURES :

ANNEXURE A1 COPY OF O.P.NO.274/2012 ON THE FILES OF THE FAMILY COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DATED 13.02.2012` ANNEXURE A2 COPY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT FILED BY THE RESPONDENT BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM IN O.P.NO.274/2012 RESPONDENTS NIL ANNEXURES :

TRUE COPY P.A.TO JUDGE