IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR TUESDAY, THE 7TH AUGUST 2007 / 16TH SRAVANA 1929 Mat.Appeal.No. 366 of 2006() ---------------------------- OP.1082/2003 of FAMILY COURT, THIRUVALLA .................... PETITIONER: IST RESPONDENT -------------------------- SHAKTHIDHARAN NAIR, S/O.RAMA PILLAI, MANGALAPALLIL HOUSE, ARUVAPPULAM MURI AND VILLAGE, KONNI, ADOOR, PRESENTLY RESIDING AT CHERUVAYALAYIL HOUSE, ARUVAPPULAM MURI, KONNI. BY ADV. SRI.BASANT BALAJI RESPONDENTS: PETITIONER ----------------------- 1. REMADEVI, D/O.JANAKI AMMA, RETNAVILASOM HOUSE, AICHADU MURI, KODUMON VILLAGE, ADOOR TALUK. 2. RADHA, PUTHUPPARAMBIL VEEDU, ATACHACKAL P.O., KONNI, PRESENTLY RESIDING AT CHERUVAYALATHIL HOUSE, ARUVAPPULAM MURI AND VILLAGE, KONNI. BY ADV. SRI. K.SHAJ SRI.SAJJU.S SRI.B.BALRAJ THIS MATRIMONIAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/08/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kurian Joseph & T.R. Ramachandran Nair, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - M.A.NO.366 of 2006 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 7th day of August, 2007 JUDGMENT T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J. This appeal is filed by the appellant challenging the judgment in O.P.No.1082/2003 of the Family Court, Thiruvalla. He was the first respondent in the original petition. The petitioner in the original petition , the first respondent herein, is his wife. The prayers in the original petition were to recover past and future maintenance as well as for recovery of Rs.1,08,500/- and value of gold ornaments with future interest. 2. The case was decided ex-parte and according to the appellant, there were sufficient reasons for his non-appearance. It is averred that it was posted to 7.7.2006 for evidence and on that day evidence of the petitioner was not taken and it was adjourned to 11.8.2005 at Adoor Camp sitting for which he had no notice. 3. We heard learned counsel for the parties. Learned counsel for the appellant contended that since there was no notice to the appellant for the camp sitting at Adoor, he could not appear and lead evidence in his support. The appellant had filed a detailed objection in the original petition denying MA 366/2006 -2- all allegations contained therein. Learned counsel therefore pleaded that as sufficient opportunity was not given to adduce evidence, the judgment passed by the Family Court may be set aside and the matter may be remanded for fresh consideration. 4. Learned counsel for the respondents strongly opposed the said prayers. It is pointed out that at any rate, since there is a judgment allowing recovery of Rs.57,500/- and 17 sovereigns of gold ornaments, in case of remand the appellant should be directed to deposit a portion of the amount for payment to the first respondent. 5. Since the appellant had filed detailed objection disputing the prayers in the original petition, we find that it is only in the interest of justice that he is allowed a further opportunity to lead evidence in his support. Therefore, the judgment under appeal is set aside and the matter is remanded to the Family Court for fresh disposal in accordance with law, after allowing both parties to adduce evidence. The appellant is directed to pay a sum of Rs.2,500/- as costs to the first respondent through her counsel within two weeks from today, and memo will be produced before the Family Court. MA 366/2006 -3- The parties are directed to appear before the Family Court on 11.9.2007. The appeal is disposed of in the above terms. (Kurian Joseph, Judge.) (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) kav/