Kerala High Court
Sunil Kumar M vs Manju Rani S.R on 26 June, 2025
Author: Devan Ramachandran
Bench: Devan Ramachandran
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.B. SNEHALATHA
THURSDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF JUNE 2025 / 5TH ASHADHA, 1947
OP (FC) NO. 371 OF 2025
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 22.08.2023 IN IA NO.4/2023 IN OP
NO.1352 OF 2020 OF FAMILY COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
PETITIONER/PETITIONER/RESPONDENT:
SUNIL KUMAR M., AGED 62 YEARS
S/O. MADHAVAN, T.C.NO.1/1203,POONTHIROAD,KUMARAPURAM,
CHERUVAKKAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, NOW RESIDING AT BLOCK
II,HOUSE NO. 405, EMS NAGAR, PATTOOR, VANCHIYOOR P.O.,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695035
SRI.GEORGE MATHEW
SHRI.BIJILY JOSEPH
SHRI.SUNIL KUMAR A.G
SHRI.MATHEW K.T.
SHRI.GEORGE K.V.
SHRI.STEPHY K REGI
SHRI.ADITHYA BENZEER
SMT.MEDHA B.S.
SHRI.JOHN ZACHARIAH DOMINIC
RESPONDENT/COUNTER PETITIONER/PETITIONER:
MANJU RANI S.R., AGED 53 YEARS
W/O. M. SUNILKUMAR, YEARS T.C. NO. 1/1203, POONTHI
ROAD, KUMARAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, NOW RESIDING AT
LAVANYA, MADATHARA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 691541
THIS OP (FAMILY COURT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
26.06.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:46317
OP (FC) NO. 371 OF 2025
2
JUDGMENT
Devan Ramachandran, J.
The petitioner challenges Ext.P6 order of the learned
Family Court, Thiruvananthapuram, in IA No.4/2023 in OP
No.1352/2020.
2. Since the legal issues involved are in a small compass,
we propose to be very compendious in what we record.
3. The petitioner is the husband of the respondent and
there are matrimonial issues between them. This led to three
cases being filed, namely OP Nos.1352/2020, 1862/2020 and MC
No.1/2021, which were eventually settled through mediation and
a Memorandum of Agreement entered into in MC No.1/2021.
4. On the assertion that the agreement aforementioned
compel the closure of OP No.1352/2020 filed by the respondent
against the petitioner, IA No.4/2023 was filed by the latter, but
which has now been dismissed by the learned Family Court
through Ext.P6.
5. Sri.George Mathew - learned counsel for the
petitioner, argued that, when an agreement had been entered
into by the parties, in which there was a specific term that the
above said Original Petition, along with OP No.1862/2020, would
2025:KER:46317
OP (FC) NO. 371 OF 2025
be withdrawn - which was, in fact, agreed to on the undertaking
of the parties that they will live together - it is unnecessary for
any further proceedings to continue with the said matters and
therefore, that his client was justified in having filed IA
No.4/2023, seeking "to close all further proceedings" ( sic) in it.
6. We have examined Ext.P6 and we notice that the
learned Family Court has considered the contention of the
petitioner and has answered it in paragraph 5 thereof.
7. The learned Family Court has affirmatively found that
an agreement was entered into between the parties in MC
No.1/2021 and that, based on the same, they agreed to live
together. It then noticed the assertion of the respondent that the
petitioner continued his "earlier ways of treating her with
cruelty" (sic) and therefore, that they again started living
separately; thus holding that the matrimonial disputes between
them persist and that she wants OP No.1352/2020 to be
prosecuted. The learned Court also found that OP No.1862/2020
was filed by the petitioner himself for restitution of conjugal
rights and that, in spite of the agreement he is relying upon, he
chose not to withdraw the same; and hence that there is merit in
what the respondent - wife is asserting.
8. We cannot find fault with the mentation of the learned
2025:KER:46317
OP (FC) NO. 371 OF 2025
Family Court, particularly when it found that the parties are in
contest as to whether the settlement between them in MC
No.1/2021 ended their disputes, which is manifest from the fact
that the petitioner - husband did not withdraw OP No.1862/2020
filed by him for restitution of conjugal rights.
9. That said, we are fully aware that IA No.4/2023 has
been filed by the petitioner seeking that both OP No.1352/2020
and OP No.1862/2020 be closed. However, even when he can
seek his petition to be closed, one fails to understand how he can
ask for the Original Petition filed by his wife, namely OP
No.1352/2020, to be closed, when she refused to withdraw it.
10. Indubitably, these issues itself are ones to be decided
by the learned Family Court during trial.
In the afore circumstances, we find no reason to
interfere with Ext.P6 and hence confirm it. However, we clarify
that every remedy of the party as available in law, including
edificed on the alleged agreement in MC No.1/2021, is left open.
Sd/- DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
JUDGE
Sd/- M.B. SNEHALATHA
JUDGE
stu
2025:KER:46317
OP (FC) NO. 371 OF 2025
APPENDIX OF OP (FC) 371/2025
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF O.P. NO. 1352 OF 2020 DTD.
11.09.2020 OF FAMILY COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF O.P.NO. 1862 OF 2020 DTD.
06.11.2020 OF THE FAMILY COURT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF MEDIATION SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
AND SETTLEMENT D NO. MDN/TVPM/1007/2021 DTD.
29.10.2021
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF ORDER DTD. 23.03.2023 IN M.C. NO.
1 OF 2021 OF ACJM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF I.A. NO. 4 OF 2023 IN O.P. NO.
1352 OF 2020 DTD. 06.06. 2023 BEFORE FAMILY
COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
Exhibit P5a TRUE COPY OF OBJECTION DTD. 19.07.2023 IN
EXT.P5
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF ORDER DTD. 22.08.2023 IN I.A. NO.
4 OF 2023 IN O.P. NO. 1352 OF 2020 OF FAMILY
COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF ORDER DTD. 10.01.2024 IN CRL.M.P.
NO. 3800 OF 2023 IN CRL.APL. NO. 156 OF 2023
OF THE SESSIONS COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
Exhibit P7(a) TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT DTD. 10.01.2024 IN
CRL.APL. NO. 156 OF 2023 OF THE SESSIONS
COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF WRITTEN STATEMENT DTD. 28.05.2024
FILED BY RESPONDENT IN EXT.P2
Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF WRITTEN STATEMENT DTD. 14.01.2025
FILED BY PETITIONER IN EXT.P1
