Op 1037/2018 Of Family Court vs By Advs
2021 Latest Caselaw 328 Ker

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                               PRESENT

             THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN

                                  &

               THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.R.ANITHA

     WEDNESDAY, THE 06TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 16TH POUSHA, 1942

                       OP (FC).No.379 OF 2020

               OP 1037/2018 OF FAMILY COURT, KOTTAYAM


PETITIONER

             SAJI GERVASIS
             AGED 54 YEARS
             S/O GERVASIS, VELLAMATTATHIL HOUSE, KOTHANALLOOR POST,
             ETTUMANOOR (NOW RESIDING AT VILLA NO 10, HARITHA HOMES,
             MANNA MEDOWS, MANNAMALA, PEROOR POST,
             ETTUMANOOR,KOTTAYAM DISTRICT-686 637.

             BY ADVS.
             SRI.JOJU KYNADY
             SRI.TOM THOMAS (KAKKUZHIYIL)
             SRI.A.ABDUL NABEEL

RESPONDENT

             DENNY
             AGED 46 YEARS
             D/O SEBASTIAN, MARAMATTATHIL HOUSE, VAKKAKKADU, PALAI,
             (NOW RESIDING AT VELLAMATTATHIL HOUSE, KOTHANALLOOR
             POST, ETTUMANOOR-686 632.

             R1 BY ADV. SRI.SHAJI THOMAS
             R1 BY ADV. SRI.JEN JAISON

     THIS OP (FAMILY COURT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06.01.2021,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 OP(FC).379 of 2020
                                   2

                            JUDGMENT

Dated : 6th January, 2021

K.Vinod Chandran, J.

1. The Original Petition is filed for early disposal of O.P.1037/2018 pending before the Family Court, Ettumanoor. O.P.1037/2018 is filed for divorce by the petitioner/husband.

2. We called for a report from the learned Family Court Judge. Going through the report, we find that when the case was posted for evidence, petitioner/husband filed I.A.1/2020 to implead the alleged paramour of the wife, which is now posted for counter of the respondent/wife.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner points out that the respondent has not filed any objection even to the Original petition filed for divorce. The learned counsel for the respondent submits that objection was not filed only because the matter was being posted for conciliation and the petitioner failed to co-operate with it.

4. In any event, we do not find any reason to direct OP(FC).379 of 2020

expeditious disposal of the OP especially since an application for impleadment has been filed only in 2020. Hence, we direct the respondent to file an objection in the I.A as also in the Original Petition, within a period of one month from today.

5. With the above direction, the Original Petition is closed. No order on Costs.

K.VINOD CHANDRAN Judge

M.R.ANITHA Judge

Mrcs/6.1.

OP(FC).379 of 2020

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF OP 1037/2018 FILED BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT AT KOTTAYAM ETTUMANOOR

EXHIBIT P2 CERTIFIED COPY OF COURT PROCEEDINGS IN OP 1037/2018 FILED BEFORE THE FAMILY COURT AT KOTTAYAM ETTUMANOOR