Kerala High Court
Rukhiya vs Ashraf on 23 March, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.G.AJITHKUMAR
Thursday, the 23rd day of March 2023 / 2nd Chaithra, 1945
IA.NO.1/2020 IN MAT.APPEAL NO. 725 OF 2020
OP 595/2016 OF FAMILY COURT, TIRUR, MALAPPURAM.
PETITIONER/APPELLANT:
RUKHIYA, 31 YEARS, D/O. USMAN, OLAMBIL HOUSE, PARITHI, ATHAVANAD
AMSOM DESOM, TIRUR TALUK, P.O.ATHAVANAD, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT,
VALANCHERY POLICE STATION LIMIT, PIN-676301.
RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT:
1. ASHRAF, AGED 52 YEARS, S/O. ALIKUTTY HAJI, VELUR HOUSE,
VADAKKEKULAMB, THOZHUVANUR AMSOM DESOM, P.O.THZHUVANUR, VALANCHERY
(VIA), VALANCHERY POLICE STATION LIMIT, PIN-676552.
2. KUNHAYISUMMA, 69 YEARS, W/O. ALIKKUTTY HAJI, VELUR HOUSE,
VADAKKEKULAMB, THOZHUVANUR AMSOM DESOM, P.O.THZHUVANUR, VALANCHERY
(VIA), VALANCHERY POLICE STATION LIMIT, PIN-676552.
3. HAJARA, 44 YEARS, D/O.ALIKUTTY HAJI, VELUR HOUSE, VADAKKEKULAMB,
THOZHUVANUR AMSOM DESOM, P.O.THZHUVANUR, VALANCHERY (VIA),
VALANCHERY POLICE STATION LIMIT, PIN-676552.
Application praying that in the circumstances stated in the
affidavit filed therewith the High Court be pleased to order conditional
attachment of the property of the respondent schedule hereunder or the
respondent may be directed to furnish the security for the value of the
same.
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.DEEPA NARAYANAN and ASHA MARIAM MATHEWS Advocates for the
appellant, and of M/S.C.M.MOHAMMED IQUABAL, N.S.SOUMYA MOL, SEENU SADIQUE
and P.ABDUL NISHAD Advocates for the respondents 2 & 3, the court passed
the following:
P.T.O.
ANIL K. NARENDRAN & P.G. AJITHKUMAR, JJ.
-----------------------------------------------------
Mat.Appeal No.725 of 2020
------------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 23rd day of March, 2023
ORDER
P.G.Ajithkumar, J.
I.A.No.1 of 2020
The appellant has filed this petition under Order XXXVIII
Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
2. The appellant filed O.P No.595 of 2016 before the
Family Court, Tirur seeking a decree of return of gold
ornaments, money including maintenance. After trial, that
original petition was dismissed as per the judgment dated
09.09.2020. Assailing the said judgment, this appeal has been
filed. The appellant would contend that there is enough
evidence to decree the original petition. But the Family Court
on a wrong appreciation of evidence, dismissed the same. The
appellant would further contend that the petition schedule
property was held under attachment during the pendency of
O.P.No.595 of 2016 and after the dismissal of that original
petition, respondents have been taking steps for alienating
the said property. Stating that there is every likelihood of
Mat.Appeal No.725 of 2020
allowing this appeal in her favour, the appellant has filed this
petition seeking attachment of the petition schedule property.
3. The respondents did not chose to file any objection.
Having considered the facts averred in the affidavit and
the submissions made by the learned counsel for the
appellant, and especially when there was an order of
attachment during the pendency of O.P.No.595 of 2016, we
are of the view that the attachment as claimed shall be
ordered.
Hence this petition is allowed.
Mat.Appeal No.725 of 2020
Call for L.C.R.
Sd/-
ANIL K. NARENDRAN, JUDGE
Sd/-
P.G. AJITHKUMAR, JUDGE
PV
23-03-2023 /True Copy/ Assistant Registrar
