Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

LAKSHMANAN PILLAI, SREEKUMARAM VEEDU versus GIRIJA KUMARI, NIRAVATHU VEEDU

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


LAKSHMANAN PILLAI, SREEKUMARAM VEEDU v. GIRIJA KUMARI, NIRAVATHU VEEDU - Mat Appeal No. 368 of 2006 [2006] RD-KL 3339 (13 December 2006)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Mat Appeal No. 368 of 2006()

1. LAKSHMANAN PILLAI, SREEKUMARAM VEEDU,
... Petitioner

Vs

1. GIRIJA KUMARI, NIRAVATHU VEEDU,
... Respondent

For Petitioner :SRI.K.GOPALAKRISHNA KURUP

For Respondent : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.RAMACHANDRAN The Hon'ble MR. Justice A.K.BASHEER

Dated :13/12/2006

O R D E R

M. RAMACHANDRAN & A.K.BASHEER, JJ.

Mat.Appeal No. 368 of 2006

Dated this the 13th day of December, 2006



J U D G M E N T

Ramachandran, J.

Heard the parties. An application had been filed by the husband supported with an affidavit alleging that the wife is insane and the issue has to be appropriately examined and decided as a preliminary issue by the Family Court. The proceedings, of course, were for return of ornaments. The order of the Family Court indicates that reasonable care had been invested. The Judge had put questions to the wife and he was satisfied that it was possible for her to give intelligent answers. She was found capable for conducting the case. Nevertheless, the court had also observed that if the appellant was serious about his allegations, the matter would be gone into in detail, in due course.

2. We find that the wife is a Government servant now working. There are also sufficient materials to show that the marriage was subsisting for almost two decades MA NO. 368 OF 2006 and two children were born in the wedlock. The hurried manner in which attempt is seen taken to tag the wife as insane cannot be countenanced in the manner attempted. The petitioner has taken the issue too lightly, forgetting that the declaration as above was capable of wrecking the life of an individual.

3. Therefore, the appeal is rejected. However, we give opportunity to the petitioner to move appropriately for further orders on the issue if he is in a position to substantiate the contentions with better materials. sd/-

M. Ramachandran, Judge

sd/-

A.K.Basheer, Judge

Mbs/ MA NO. 368 OF 2006 M. RAMACHANDRAN &

A.K.BASHEER, JJ

W.P.(FC).NO. OF 200

J U D G M E N T

MA NO. 368 OF 2006

DATED: -11-2006


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.