IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN MONDAY, THE 6TH DECEMBER 2010 / 15TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 Mat.Appeal.No. 45 of 2008() --------------------------- OP.295/2006 of FAMILY COURT, THIRUVALLA .................... PETITIONER(S): APPELLANTS/RESPONDENTS OP 295/2006 ------------------------------------------------- 1. A.K.RAGHAVAN, AGED 66 YEARS, ALAPPAMANNIL, PUTHENPEEDIKA, OMALLUR VILLAGE, PATHANAMTHITTA. 2. PONNAMMA, AGED 61 YEARS, ALAPPAMANNIL, PUTHENPEEDIKA, OMALLUR VILLAGE, PATHANAMTHITTA. BY ADV. SRI.SAJITH KUMAR V. RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER IN OP 295/2006 ---------------------------------------- 1. SUSHAMMA BABU, AGED 30 YEARS, W/O. BABU, ALAPPAMANNIL PUTHENVEETTIL, PUTHENPEEDIKA, OMALLUR VILLAGE, PATHANAMTHITTA. 2. BABU, AGED 36 YEARS, S/O. A.K.RAGHAVAN, ALAPPAMANNIL, PUTHENPEEDIKA, OMALLUR VILLAGE, PATHANAMTHITTA. ADV. SRI.ALEXANDER PETER FOR R1 SRI.GEORGEKUTTY MATHEW FOR R2 THIS MATRIMONIAL APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT & K. SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------- Mat. Appeal No. 45 of 2008-E ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 6th day of December, 2010 JUDGMENT Basant,J. Heard both sides. The challenge is against the ex parte order passed in O.P.No.295/06 under which the appellant was directed to pay a total amount of Rs.2,66,000/- along with interest, costs etc. 2. There was delay in filing the Mat. Appeal and the delay was condoned subject to the condition that 50% of the entire amount due under the impugned order must be deposited and that security must be furnished for the entire balance amount. Those conditions have been complied with. The matter comes up today for admission hearing. After discussions at the Bar, both parties agree that this appeal can be allowed, the impugned order can be set aside and the court below can be directed to dispose of the O.P. within a prescribed time limit. The appeal Mat. Appeal No. 45 of 2008 -: 2 :- may accordingly be allowed subject to such conditions, submit both counsel. 2. We are satisfied that the common submission of both counsel can be accepted. This appeal can be allowed, the impugned order can be set aside and the court below can be directed to dispose of O.P.No.295/06 afresh in accordance with law within a stipulated period of time. 3. In the result: (a) This appeal is allowed. (b) The impugned order is set aside. (c) The court below i.e., the Family Court, Thiruvalla, is directed to dispose of O.P.No.295/06 afresh as expeditiously as possible - at any rate, within a period of 4 months from 20/12/10 on which day both parties shall appear before the court below. (d) The amount in deposit shall be retained by the Family Court and appropriate orders shall be passed while disposing of O.P.No.295/06 afresh as directed above. (e) Parties shall suffer their respective costs in this appeal. Sd/- R. BASANT (Judge) Sd/- K. SURENDRA MOHAN (Judge) Nan/ //true copy// P.S. to Judge Mat. Appeal No. 45 of 2008 -: 3 :- Mat. Appeal No. 45 of 2008 -: 4 :- R. BASANT & K. SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------- C.M. Appl.No.128 of 2008 in Mat. Appeal No. 45 of 2008 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 2nd day of December, 2010 ORDER Basant,J. Heard. The certificate is not produced as directed vide order dated 1/7/10. A receipt is produced to show deposit of an amount of Rs.1,67,600/- before the court below. The learned counsel for the 1st respondent submits that the 1st respondent concedes that the conditions have been complied with. We are, in these circumstances, satisfied that it is not necessary to wait for production of the certificate. We reckon and accept that the conditions have been complied with. The delay shall hence stand condoned. Mat. Appeal No.45/08: Call tomorrow for hearing for admission. R. BASANT (Judge) K. SURENDRA MOHAN (Judge) Mat. Appeal No. 45 of 2008 -: 5 :- Nan/