Ranjithkumar vs Soorya
2021 Latest Caselaw 85 Ker

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                PRESENT

            THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN

                                   &

                 THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.R.ANITHA

     MONDAY, THE 04TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 14TH POUSHA, 1942

                         OP (FC).No.480 OF 2020

  AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN OP 91/2016 OF FAMILY COURT, PALAKKAD


PETITIONER/S:

                RANJITHKUMAR,
                AGED 43 YEARS,
                S/O. RAMANKUTTY, KAILAS HOUSE, PONNAMPILAKKAL,
                KUZHALMANNAM, ALATHUR TALUK,
                PALAKKAD DISTRICT-678572.

                BY ADV. SMT.P.USHAKUMARI

RESPONDENT/S:

                SOORYA,
                W/O. RANJITHKUMAR, AGED 34, PALAKKOD HOUSE, MATHOOR
                P.O., CHUNKAMANNAM, PALAKKAD DISTRICT-678571.


     THIS OP (FAMILY COURT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD                 ON
04.01.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 OP (FC).No.480 OF 2020            2

                              JUDGMENT

Dated this the 4th day of January 2021

K.VINOD CHANDRAN, J.

Petitioner is before this Court seeking adjournment of

the evidence posted on 06.01.2021 before the Family Court,

Palakkad. The Original Petitions posted for evidence are

three in number; one, an application for divorce filed by

the respondent wife, then, a petition filed to set aside

two sale deeds which stood in the name of the respondent;

which the petitioner claimed was purchased by his hard

earned money and third, a counter claim filed by the wife

in the petition filed by the petitioner, for dispossessing

him from the residential house, which is the subject matter

of one of the sale deeds.

2. Admittedly, even going by the Original Petition, the

matter was posted for evidence on 12.11.2020, when Ext.P5

petition along with a medical certificate was filed by the

petitioner to remove the case from the list, for reason of

he being the bye-stander to his bed ridden father. The

Family Court is said to have dismissed the petition, but

however, adjourned the matter to 02.12.2020. On

02.12.2020, an application was filed by the petitioner on

the ground that this Original Petition is pending before

this Court. The Family Court adjourned the matter to

06.01.2021.

3. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that

the petitioner is still attending to his father, and due to

the pandemic situation, he is unable to give evidence

before the Court, which is said to be carried on in a small

court hall. However, on our discrete enquiry, we are told

that the petitioner is staying separate from his father and

mother. Learned Counsel was specifically asked to verify

the said fact, when the matter was taken up in the morning.

At 1.45 p.m., when the matter was taken up, learned Counsel

on instructions submits that he stays in his residence,

separate from his father and mother only because the said

residential property is the subject matter of one of the

suits and if he vacates the same, he will be dispossessed

of the house. In fact, the said submission indicates that

the petitioner's father does not need constant attention of

the petitioner. We are also of the opinion that there

should be some expedition showed in such matters,

especially since the Original Petitions are filed in the

year 2016. The pandemic situation has set the clock back

in the year 2020 and though there is no let up in the

situation, life has to go on and so has the affairs of the

world to be proceeded with. We do not find any reason to

interfere with the posting of the case. Admittedly, the

petitioner's father and mother are staying in a house by

themselves. Petitioner also is staying within Palakkad

district, which is about 12 kms from the Family Court,

Palakkad. In such circumstances, we direct the petitioner

to appear before the Family Court on 06.01.2021, when the

matter is posted for evidence.

The Original Petition is dismissed though the

respondent has not appeared. The Registry shall communicate

the order to the Family Court Palakkad before 06.01.2021.

Sd/-

K.VINOD CHANDRAN

JUDGE

Sd/-

M.R.ANITHA

JUDGE

uu/04.01.2021

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 PHOTOSTAT COPY OF OP NO.91/2016 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT BEFORE THE LEARNED FAMILY COURT, PALAKKAD, AGAINST THE PETITIONER FOR DIVORCE.

EXHIBIT P2 PHOTOSTAT COPY OF OP NO.445/2016 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE LEARNED FAMILY COURT, PALAKKAD AGAINST THE RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P3 PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT ALONG WITH COUNTER CLAIM FILED BY THE RESPONDENT IN OP NO.445/2016 BEFORE THE LEARNED FAMILY COURT, PALAKKAD AGAINST THE PETITIONER.

EXHIBIT P4(A) PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE CT SCAN REPORT DATED 19/01/2020 ISSUED BY THE PALAKKAD MEDICAL AND RESEARCH CENTRE LIMITED.

EXHIBIT P4(B) PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE CAROTID AND VERTEBRAL DOPPLER STUDY REPORT DATED 20/01/2020 ISSUED BY THE PALAKKAD MEDICAL AND RESEARCH CENTRE LIMITED.

EXHIBIT P4(C) PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE MRI SCAN REPORT DATED 20/01/2020 ISSUED BY THE PALAKKAD MRI.

EXHIBIT P4(D) PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE DISCHARGE SUMMARY DATED 25/01/2020 OF THE PETITIONER'S FATHER WHO HAS HOSPITALIZED IN THE THANKAM HOSPITAL, PALAKKAD.

EXHIBIT P5 PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER TO REMOVE OP NO.445/2016 AND OP NO.91/2016 FROM THE LIST OF THE LEARNED FAMILY COURT, PALAKKAD.

EXHIBIT P6 PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE MEDICAL CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE DOCTOR WHO TREATS THE PETITIONER DATED 11/11/2020.