The Kerala High Court has observed that in matrimonial disputes especially in the matters relating to dissolution of marriage, delay in challenging the order of the Family Court is fatal as there are chances of parties altering their status after the appeal period, as in this case. After the appeal period, the respondent has contracted another marriage on 07/03/2025. Great care and caution has to be exercised while condoning the delay in filing the application for setting aside ex parte decrees after the appeal period as it has the effect of affecting the rights of third parties.
A Division Bench of Dr. Justice A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar and Justice Preeta A.K. dismissed the Matrimonial Appeal filed by Sujithra P.A. challenging the orders of the Family Court, North Paravur, dismissing I.A.No.1/2025 and I.A.No.16/2025 in O.P.No.329/2024.
O.P.No.329/2024 was filed by the husband/respondent herein seeking a decree of divorce. In the proceedings before the Family Court, the appellant/wife was set ex parte. Vide order dated 10/09/2024, the Family Court, N.Paravur granted an ex parte decree of divorce. On coming to know of the decree, the appellant filed an application for setting aside the ex parte decree along with an application for condoning the delay of 160 days in filing the application for setting aside the ex parte decree. The reason for delay as raised by the appellant was that the registered notice from the Family Court was not served on the appellant.
Vide order dated 04/08/2025, the Family Court, N.Paravur, allowed the application on payment of cost of ₹3,000/- to the respondent. Aggrieved thereby, the respondent herein filed an appeal before this Court as Mat.Appeal No.816 of 2025. This Court, after considering the rival contentions, set aside the order passed by the Family Court and directed the Family Court to reconsider the matter on merits after granting an opportunity to the parties for leading evidence as the matter involved disputed questions of facts. On remand, the trial court permitted both parties to let in evidence and based on the evidence on record, dismissed the petitions filed by the appellant.
The appellant in this Mat.Appeal has reiterated her contention that she was unaware of the pendency of the original petition seeking divorce and that the summons issued from the trial court through registered post was accepted by someone else by impersonation and that her signature was forged in the acknowledgment due card. Both parties adduced evidence and the appellant examined the Postmaster and the Postman as PW1 and PW2 respectively and Exts.X1 and X2 were marked through them. The respondent produced Exts.B1 to B3 documents.
The Family Court considered the evidence and came to the conclusion that two registered notices issued from Family Court, N.Paravur, were served on her on 06/06/2024 and on 09/07/2024 respectively, and thus rejected the contention of the appellant regarding non-receipt of the notices from Family Court. The interlocutory applications filed by the appellant were thus dismissed.
On an appreciation of the findings on record, the High Court found that the Family Court has appreciated the evidence in its right perspective and in view of the overwhelming evidence regarding service of notice on the appellant, it could only have dismissed the petition. The High Court found no illegality or perversity in the findings of the Family Court and hence there is no reason to interfere with the orders impugned.
Accordingly, the Mat. Appeal is devoid of merits and is dismissed. No costs.
Case Details:
Sujithra P.A. Versus Anishkumar T.R.
Mat.Appeal No. 296 of 2026
Date: 26 May 2026
Bench: Dr. Justice A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar & Justice Preeta A.K.
Click HERE for full Judgment.
Lawcutor 