Geevarghese Mammen Koyipally vs K. Ann Maria @ Ann Maria
2024 Latest Caselaw 5759 Ker

Kerala High Court

Geevarghese Mammen Koyipally vs K. Ann Maria @ Ann Maria on 20 February, 2024

Author: Anu Sivaraman

Bench: Anu Sivaraman

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                              PRESENT
           THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
                                  &
          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.PRATHEEP KUMAR
TUESDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 / 1ST PHALGUNA, 1945
                    MAT.APPEAL NO. 756 OF 2023
     AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN OP 1040/2020 OF FAMILY COURT,
                     KOTTAYAM DATED 27.4.2021
APPELLANT/RESPONDENT IN OP:

           GEEVARGHESE MAMMEN KOYIPALLY
           AGED 33 YEARS, S/O MAMMEN K.G,
           KOYIPALLIL HOUSE, KARIPUZHA P.O, KADAVOOR,
           KANNAMANGALAM VILLAGE, MAVELIKKARA TALUK,
           ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT REPRESENTED BY HIS POWER
           OF ATTORNEY HOLDER AND FATHER K.G MAMMEN,
           KOYIPALLIL HOUSE, KARIPUZHA P.O, KADAVOOR,
           KANNAMANGALAM VILLAGE, MAVELIKKARA TALUK,
           ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN - 690103
           BY ADVS.
           V.PHILIP MATHEWS
           ASHISH MATHEW JOHN
           ABY SKARIA


RESPONDENT/PETITIONER IN OP:

           K. ANN MARIA @ ANN MARIA
           AGED 32 YEARS, D/O. K. BABU JOSEPH,
           KUZHIMTHOTTIYIL HOUSE, ATHIRAMPUZHA PO,
           KOTTAYAM TALUK, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT,
           PIN - 686562
           BY ADVS.
           HARISANKAR.N.UNNI
           ANITHA RAVINDRAN(K/296/1990)
           T.SUJA(K/3190/1999)



       THIS MATRIMONIAL APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON    15.02.2024,   THE   COURT   ON   20.02.2024   DELIVERED   THE
FOLLOWING:
    Mat. Appeal. 756/2023

                                     2




                             JUDGMENT

Dated this the 20th day of February, 2024

C. Pratheep Kumar, J.

This appeal is filed by the respondent in O.P. No.1040 of 2020

on the file of Family Court, Kottayam, against the judgment dated

27.4.2020.

2. The appellant is the wife of the respondent. The respondent

filed the above O.P. under Section 10 (1)(x) of Indian Divorce Act

for dissolution of marriage. As per the impugned judgment, the

Family Court Kottayam allowed the above O.P. and a decree of

dissolution of marriage was passed. It is an ex-parte decree.

Aggrieved by the above decree, the appellant preferred this appeal.

3. According to the appellant, he has not received any notice

from the Family Court and that is why he could not appear before

the trial court to defend the case. He has got a very good case to be

presented before the trial court. Therefore, he prayed for setting

aside the ex-parte decree.

4. At the time of arguments, the learned counsel for the

respondent opposed the appeal. Since the appellant was abroad, the

process was completed by substituted service and it was in the above

context the impugned decree was passed ex-parte. The learned

counsel for the respondent pressed for exemplary cost, in case the

appeal is allowed.

5. Admittedly, at the time when the process was issued from

the trial court, the appellant was abroad. It was in the above

context, the notice could not be served to the appellant. The

respondent filed this O.P. in the year 2020 and obtained the decree

on 27.4.2021, which is now sought to be set aside. Therefore, the

respondent is entitled to get reasonable cost to compensate the

inconvenience caused to her by the above delay. Considering the

entire facts, we hold that a cost of Rs.25,000/- will be a reasonable

cost in this case.

In the result, the appeal is allowed. The impugned judgment is

set aside on condition that the appellant shall pay a cost of

Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) to the respondent

through counsel, within a period of 15 days from today. In case the

appellant fails to comply with the above direction, this appeal will

stand dismissed.

Sd/-

ANU SIVARAMAN, JUDGE

Sd/-

C. PRATHEEP KUMAR, JUDGE sou.