Sillu Alpha Antony vs Lijo jose — 101674/2024

Case under Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 Section 144. Status: Issue NBW. Next hearing: 20th May 2026.

Issue NBW Next hearing 20-May-2026 this date has passed

Crl.MP - CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETN.

CNR: KLAL320024752024

e-Filing Number

03-09-2024

Filing Number

102470/2024

Filing Date

03-Sep-2024

Registration No

101674/2024

Registration Date

03-Sep-2024

Court

JFCM Ramankary

Judge

1-Judicial First Class Magistrate, Ramankary

Last updated 12-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 Section 144

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.Sillu Alpha Antony

    Adv. Sudeep V Nair

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.Lijo jose

Case History

  1. 20-May-2026

    Next hearingPending

  2. 11-Mar-2026

    Issue NBW

    Judicial First Class Magistrate, Ramankary

  3. 19-Feb-2026

    Issue Non Bailable Warrant

    Judicial First Class Magistrate, Ramankary

  4. 16-Feb-2026

    Appearance Of Parties

    Judicial First Class Magistrate, Ramankary

  5. 13-Feb-2026

    Call on

    Judicial First Class Magistrate, Ramankary

  6. 07-Feb-2026

    Appearance Of Parties

    Judicial First Class Magistrate, Ramankary

  7. 30-Jan-2026

    OrderView PDF

    Summary: The petition (CMP 1862/2025) seeking modification of a domestic maintenance order under Section 25 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act was dismissed. The applicant (respondent in original case MC 12/2022) claimed financial hardship after losing his job abroad and argued that the respondent/applicant earning ₹50,000 monthly as a teacher should maintain him. The court rejected this argument as unsustainable, finding no genuine change in circumstances justifying modification of the original order requiring him to pay ₹5,000 monthly plus ₹7,000 rent, and dismissed the application as devoid of merit with no costs awarded. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  8. 30-Jan-2026

    For Payment

    Judicial First Class Magistrate, Ramankary

  9. 27-Jan-2026

    Call with Mp

    Judicial First Class Magistrate, Ramankary

  10. 17-Jan-2026

    For Payment

    Judicial First Class Magistrate, Ramankary

  11. 12-Dec-2025

    Call with Mp

    Judicial First Class Magistrate, Ramankary

  12. 06-Dec-2025

    Call with Mp

    Judicial First Class Magistrate, Ramankary

  13. 15-Nov-2025

    For Payment

    Judicial First Class Magistrate, Ramankary

  14. 25-Oct-2025

    For appearance of the accused

    Judicial First Class Magistrate, Ramankary

  15. 04-Oct-2025

    For Payment

    Judicial First Class Magistrate, Ramankary

  16. 20-Sep-2025

    For Payment

    Judicial First Class Magistrate, Ramankary

  17. 25-Aug-2025

    For Payment

    Judicial First Class Magistrate, Ramankary

  18. 26-Jul-2025

    For Payment

    Judicial First Class Magistrate, Ramankary

  19. 27-Jun-2025

    Appearance Of Parties

    Judicial First Class Magistrate, Ramankary

  20. 20-Jun-2025

    For objecting and hearing Cmp

    Judicial First Class Magistrate, Ramankary

  21. 24-May-2025

    For objecting and hearing Cmp

    Judicial First Class Magistrate, Ramankary

  22. 11-Apr-2025

    For objecting and hearing Cmp

    Judicial First Class Magistrate, Ramankary

  23. 22-Feb-2025

    For objecting and hearing Cmp

    Judicial First Class Magistrate, Ramankary

  24. 18-Jan-2025

    For objecting and hearing Cmp

    Judicial First Class Magistrate, Ramankary

  25. 21-Dec-2024

    No sitting notified

    Judicial First Class Magistrate, Ramankary

  26. 05-Oct-2024

    For objecting and hearing Cmp

    Judicial First Class Magistrate, Ramankary

  27. 03-Sep-2024

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  28. 03-Sep-2024

    Case filed

    Registration No. 101674/2024

casestatus.in Summary

Summary: The petition (CMP 1862/2025) seeking modification of a domestic maintenance order under Section 25 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act was dismissed. The applicant (respondent in original case MC 12/2022) claimed financial hardship after losing his job abroad and argued that the respondent/applicant earning ₹50,000 monthly as a teacher should maintain him. The court rejected this argument as unsustainable, finding no genuine change in circumstances justifying modification of the original order requiring him to pay ₹5,000 monthly plus ₹7,000 rent, and dismissed the application as devoid of merit with no costs awarded. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

High Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case