Valsala v. Geetha

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.KEMAL PASHA MONDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF AUGUST 2015/9TH BHADRA, 1937 OP(Crl.).No. 273 of 2015 (Q) ----------------------------- MC.NO. 85/2013 OF MUNSIFF MAGISTRATE COURT, PARAVUR ------------------ PETITIONER :

--------------------- VALSALA W/O. LATE MOHANAN PILLAI AGED 61 YEARS, HAVING PERMANENT ADDRESS AT VETTIKUNNUVILA VADAKKATHIL KURUMANDAL B, PARAVUR, KOLLAM DISTRICT AND PRESENTLY RESIDING AT JYOTSNA VALIYAVILA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

BY ADVS.SRI.R.MANOJ SMT.SINDHU MANOJ RESPONDENT(S) :

---------------------------- 1.

GEETHA AGED 35 YEARS, POOTHAVILA VEEDU POOTHAKULAM P.O., PARAVUR - 683 513.

2.

VAJRA D/O. RAJESH, MINOR, AGED 11 YEARS, POOTHAVILA VEEDU POOTHAKULAM P.O., PARAVUR - 683 513 REP. BY HER MOTHER GEETHA.

3.

VAIGA AGED 8 YEARS, D/O. RAJESH, POOTHAVILA VEEDU, POOTHAKULAM P.O., PARAVUR - 683 513 REP. BY HER MOTHER GEETHA.

4.

RAJESH VETTIKUNNUVILA VADAKKATHIL KURUMANDAL B, PARAVUR KOLLAM DISTRICT - 683 513.

5.

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM - 682 031.

R5 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. MAYA THIS OP (CRIMINAL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31-08-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Mn ...2/-

OP(Crl.).No. 273 of 2015 (Q) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS :

EXT.P1 : COPY OF THE SALE IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER DATED 5/7/2012. EXT.P2 COPY OF THE MC NO. 85/2013 ON THE FILES OF THE MUNSIFF MAGISTRATE, PARAVUR DATED 2/7/2013.

EXT.P3 COPY OF OBJECTIONS IN MC NO. 85/2013 OF THE MUNSIFFMAGISTRATE, PARAVUR. EXT.P4 COPY OF THE CMP NO. 354(a)/2015 IN MC NO. 85/2013 DATED 6/2/2015. EXT.P5 COPY OF THE ORDER IN CAMP NO. 354(a)/2015 IN MC NO. 85/2013 DATED 6/2/2015.

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS : NIL //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE Mn

B. KEMAL PASHA, J.

................................................................ O.P.(Crl) No.273 of 2015 ............................................................... Dated this the 31st day of August, 2015

J U D G M E N T

Heard.

2.

An interim protection order under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 is under challenge. It seems that the petitioner has not taken recourse to the provision under Section 25(2) or 29 of the said Act. Even without having recourse to the provisions under Sections 25(2) of the said Act, it is open to the petitioner to approach the appellate court under Section 29 of the said Act.

With the said observation, this Original Petition is closed.

Sd/- B.KEMAL PASHA, JUDGE ul/- [True copy] P.S. to Judge