Navas vs Shamsudheen
2022 Latest Caselaw 9547 Ker

Mat.Appeal No.576/2022                          1/2

                            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                            PRESENT
                         THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE
                                               &
                            THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SOPHY THOMAS
             Thursday, the 25th day of August 2022 / 3rd Bhadra, 1944
                    IA.NO.1/2022 IN MAT.APPEAL NO. 576 OF 2022
               OP(Money) 422/2014 OF FAMILY COURT, CHAVARA, KOLLAM.
   PETITIONERS/APPELLANTS/RESPONDENTS:

       1. NAVAS, AGED 41 YEARS, S/O.IBRAHIM KUTTY (LATE),
          POOVANPALLIPUTHEPURAYIL, EDAVANASSERY MURI, MYNAGAPPALLY VILLAGE,
          KUNNATHOOR TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT- 690 519.
       2. MUTHU BEEVI, AGED 71 YEARS, POOVANPALLIPUTHEPURAYIL, EDAVANASSERY
          MURI, MYNAGAPPALLY VILLAGE, KUNNATHOOR TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT- 690
          519.

   RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS:

       1. SHAMSUDHEEN, AGED 61 YEARS, S/O. MYTHEENKUNJU, THADATHINTE
          KIZHAKKATHIL VEEDU (EDATHARA), KADAPPA MURI, MYNAGAPPALLY VILLAGE,
          KUNNATHOOR TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT- 690 519.
       2. RASHEEDA BEEVI, AGED 56 YEARS, W/O.SHAMSUDHEEN, THADATHINTE
          KIZHAKKATHIL VEEDU (EDATHARA), KADAPPA MURI, MYNAGAPPALLY VILLAGE,
          KUNNATHOOR TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT - 690 519.
       3. NAFRIN NAVAS, AGED 12 YEARS, D/O.RAMSEENA (LATE), REPRESENTED BY
          GUARDIAN- GRANDFATHER, SHAMSUDHEEN, THADATHINTE KIZHAKKATHIL VEEDU
          (EDATHARA), KADAPPA MURI, MYNAGAPPALLY VILLAGE, KUNNATHOOR TALUK,
          KOLLAM DISTRICT - 690 519.


        Application praying that in the circumstances stated in the
   affidavit filed therewith the High Court be pleased to stay of all further
   proceedings pursuant to the Common Judgment dated 27.5.2022 in O.P.(Money)
   No.422 of 2014 of the Family Court, Chavara, pending disposal of the above
   Mat.Appeal.


        This Application coming on for orders, upon perusing the application
   and the affidavit filed in support thereof, and upon hearing the arguments
   of M/S.SINDHU SANTHALINGAM, A.D.SHAJAN and RAJEEV RAJADHANI, Advocates for
   the applicants, and of B.KRISHNA MANI Advocate for the respondents, the
   court passed the following:
 Mat.Appeal No.576/2022                     2/2

                                      ORDER

The learned counsel for the respondents vehimently opposed granting stay. However, in the light of the facts and circumstances, we grant stay against the execution of the relief No.1 on condition that the appellant furnish security to the satisfaction of the Family Court within a period of two months. We make it clear that we are not stayed relief No.2. Any property under attachment also can be offered as security.

                                            Sd/- A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE JUDGE


                                                 Sd/- SOPHY THOMAS JUDGE




25-08-2022                   /True Copy/                              Assistant Registrar