Kerala High Court
Deljo Vincent vs Deepa on 30 November, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SOPHY THOMAS
Tuesday, the 30th day of November 2021 / 9th Agrahayana, 1943
RP NO. 855 OF 2021 IN OP (FC) 376/2021
REVIEW PETITIONER/RESPONDENT NO.1 IN OP(FC):
DELJO VINCENT, AGED 45 YEARS, S/O.P.M. VINCENT,
PARAKADAN (H) OLIVEMENUNT, THABORE P.O.,
ALUVA TALUK, ERNAKULAM-683 577.
RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER IN OP(FC)/RESPONDENT NO.2 TO 3 IN OP(FC):
1. DEEPA M.K., AGED 41, D/O.KUNJAPPAN, MULAVARIAKKAL,
THUNDAPARAMBIL ROAD, DASABIMANI, KALOOR, COCHIN-17, ERNAKULAM.
2. P.M. VINCENT, AGED 69 YEARS, PARAKADAN (H) OLIVEMENUNT,
THABORE P.O., ALUVA TALUK, ERNAKULAM-683 577.
3. ROSILY VINCENT, AGED 63 YEARS, W/O.P.M. VINCENT,
PARAKADAN (H) OLIVEMENUNT, THABORE P.O.,
ALUVA TALUK, ERNAKULAM-683 577.
Review Petition praying that in the circumstances stated therein the
High Court be pleased to review the judgment in OP(FC)No.376/2021 dated
25/10/2021 and to allow the Review petition.
This Review petition coming on for orders upon perusing the petition and
this Court's judgment dated 25/10/2021 in OP(FC)No.376/2021and upon hearing
the arguments of SRI.BIJU P.N., Advocate for the petitioner, SRI.N. SUKUMARAN
(SENIOR ADVOCATE) along with M/S. V.K. BALACHANDRAN, S. SHYAM, N.K. KARNIS &
KURUVILLA JOHN, Advocates for the respondents, the court passed the
following:-
P.T.O.
A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE & SOPHY THOMAS, JJ.
----------------------------------------------------
R.P No.855 of 2021
in
O.P (FC) No.376 of 2021
----------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 30th day of November, 2021
ORDER
A.Muhamed Mustaque, J
The review petition is filed at the instance of the 1 st
respondent. Based on the orders of this Court, it is submitted that
the review petitioner has been arrested for non-payment of the
maintenance and he is now detained in Viyyur Central Jail as per
the proceedings in MP No.301 of 2015 in MC No.113 of 2015
before the Family Court, Ernakulam. The 1 st respondent-wife is
present before this Court and she has no objection in releasing
him. We asked the learned counsel for the review petitioner to
settle the disputes. It seems that there was an initial deliberation
regarding resolution of the disputes by conveying 50 cents of
land to the respondents. It was not acceptable for the
respondents.
2. Today, the review petitioner offered 60 cents of land to
the respondents to settle the dispute. Out of 60 cents 30 cents of
R.P No.855 of 2021 in O.P (FC) No.376 of 2021
..2..
land in the name of the 1st respondent and the balance 30 cents
in the joint name of the 1st respondent and their son.
3. Based on the submission as above, we are of the view
that the review petitioner is ordered to be released on the
strength of the settlement arrived at now. The review petitioner
shall be released to facilitate the above settlement. If the
settlement is not worked out, the review petitioner is to be
detained in the prison in accordance with the order now passed
by the Family Court.
We direct both the parties to appear before this Court on
7.12.2021.
Post on 7.12.2021.
Sd/-
A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, JUDGE
Sd/-
SOPHY THOMAS, JUDGE
Hand Over
PR
30-11-2021 /True Copy/ Assistant Registrar
