IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID THURSDAY, THE 28TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 9TH PHALGUNA 1929 MFA.No. 292 of 2001() --------------------- OP.123/2000 of FAMILY COURT, MALAPPURAM .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER: ----------- JOSE ANTONY, S/O. ALAPPURATH ANTONY, KURUMBALANGODE AMSOM DESOM, MURUKANHIRAM, P.O. PATHAR, REPRESENTED BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER EMMANUAL ANTHONY, S/O. ALAPPURATH ANTHONY, PATHER P.O., NILAMBUR. BY ADV. SRI.B.S.SWATHY KUMAR RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1.JUDI, AGED 32 YEARS, D/O. MADATHIL PARAMBIL XAVIER, MOOPANAD VILLAGE, P.O. MEPPADI, VAITHIRI TALUK, WAYANAD TALUK. 2.RAVI, S/O. PULINILKKUNNATHIL KRISHNANKUTTY, ADARSH FANCY AND FOOTWEAR, CHUNGATHARA AMSOM DESOM, P.O. BHOODAN COLONY, NHETTIKULAM. BY // THIS MISC. FIRST APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: KURIAN JOSEPH & HARUN-UL-RASHID, JJ. ---------------------------------------------------------------- M.F.A.NO. 292 OF 2001 ---------------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 28th day of February, 2008 JUDGMENT Kurian Joseph, J. This appeal is at the instance of the petitioner in O.P. No. 123 of 2000 on the file of the Family Court, Manjeri. The said Original Petition was filed praying for a decree of divorce on the ground of adultery. The adulterer is impleaded as the second respondent. It is seen that the Original Petition was dismissed on the ground that the appellant was continuously absent. 2. According to the learned counsel appearing for the appellant/petitioner, the power of attorney holder of the appellant was present before the court. Be that as it may, we are of the view that the dismissal of the Original Petition for default may not stand in the way of the appellant approaching the Family Court, if required, incorporating additional grounds, if any, available in view of the intervening developments. We do not find that such a course of action will cause any M.F.A.NO.292/2001 2 prejudice to the parties. Therefore, we dispose of the appeal making it clear that the judgment and decree under appeal shall not stand in the way of the appellant filing a fresh petition for divorce incorporating additional grounds, if any, in view of the intervening developments. (KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE) (HARUN-UL-RASHID, JUDGE) sp/ M.F.A.NO.292/2001 3 KURAIN JOSEPH & HAURN-UL-RASHID, J.J M.F.A.NO.292/2001 JUDGMENT 28TH FEBRUARY, 2008