IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM AS.No. 572 of 2002() 1. JERVAS CHRISTIC BAI, MANAGING PARTNER Petitioner Vs 1. CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY Respondent 2. M/S.SAGARA SAMPATH COMPANY KUREEPUZHA, 3. JOHN JERVEAS FERNANDEZ, 4. RAJAN JERVEAS FERNANDEZ, 5. KALEEKAL NARAYANA PILLAI 6. RAYMOND HILLARIOUS, 7. MANAPPALLIL VARUGHESE ISSAC, 8. JERVEAS HERBERT FERNANDEZ, 9. A.THRESIA, VAYALAM MODIYIL, 10. STANCIE CHRISTIE, VAYALAN KODIYIL, 11. MARY HELEN JOSEPH, VALIYA VEEDU, 12. RAYMOND JOSEPH (R.JOSEPH), For Petitioner :SRI.PHILIP ANTONY CHACKO For Respondent :GOVERNMENT PLEADER The Hon'ble MR. Justice [ENTITY] (RETD.JUDGE) SHRI K.J.THOMAS STANLEY(RETD.ADDL.DIST.JUDGE) Dated :27/07/2009 O R D E R JUSTICE [ENTITY] (RETD. JUDGE, HIGH COURT OF KERALA) & [ENTITY] (RETD. DISTRICT JUDGE) [CASE NUMBER] [CASE NUMBER] Dated this the 27th day of July, 2009 AWARD Counsel for the appellants and respondents are present. The matter has been settled and a compromise petition has been filed. The Compromise petition will form part of the Award. No amount is due to the respondent. The documents received from the lower court and produced in [CASE NUMBER] will be returned to the appellant's counsel as early as possible. All appeals were filed as indigent. Therefore, in view of the fact that the matter is settled, no court fee is payable in the light of the decision in [CASE NUMBER] dated 4th August, 1995. It is agreed that [CASE NUMBER] has become infructuous and therefore, it is dismissed. An Award is passed accordingly. [ENTITY] (RETD. JUDGE, HIGH COURT OF KERALA) [ENTITY] (RETD. DISTRICT JUDGE) dvs ? IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM +Crl.[CASE NUMBER]() #1. [ENTITY], W/O. JAMIL, AGED 36, Petitioner 2. [ENTITY], W/O. [ENTITY], 3. [ENTITY], S/O. [ENTITY], Vs $1. [ENTITY], REPRESENTED BY Respondent 2. [ENTITY], W/O. DELTON, AGED 27, ! For Petitioner :[ENTITY] ^ For Respondent : No Appearance *Coram The Hon'ble MR. Justice [ENTITY] % Dated :23/07/2009 : O R D E R
[ENTITY], J.
ORDER Petitioners are respondents in [CASE NUMBER] on the file of Judicial First Class Magistrate's Court, Paravur filed by second respondent under [SECTION] of [ACT]. This petition is filed under [SECTION] of [ACT] to quash the proceedings as against the petitioners contending that second respondent is not an aggrieved person and her husband is not impleaded in the petition before the Magistrate and second respondent is not entitled to claim a residential order in respect of the property of the petitioners and therefore, the case as against them is to be quashed. Reliance was placed on the decisions of the Apex Court in S.R.Batra v. Taruna Batra 2007) 3 SCC 169) and [PRECEDENT].
2. On hearing the learned counsel, I find no reason to interfere with the proceedings pending before the learned Magistrate in exercise of the powers under [SECTION] of [ACT]. Petitioners are entitled to canvass all the grounds agitated in this petition before the Magistrate.
Petition is dismissed.
23rd July, 2009 ([ENTITY], Judge) tkv