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.

Crl.MP - CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PETN.

CNR: KLAL320024752024

Issue NBW

Next Hearing

20th May 2026

e-Filing Number

03-09-2024

Filing Number

102470/2024

Filing Date

03-09-2024

Registration No

101674/2024

Registration Date

03-09-2024

Court

JFCM Ramankary

Judge

1-Judicial First Class Magistrate, Ramankary

Acts & Sections

Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 Section 144

Petitioner(s)

Sillu Alpha Antony

Adv. Sudeep V Nair

Respondent(s)

Lijo jose

Hearing History

Judge: 1-Judicial First Class Magistrate, Ramankary

11-03-2026

Issue NBW

19-02-2026

Issue Non Bailable Warrant

16-02-2026

Appearance Of Parties

13-02-2026

Call on

07-02-2026

Appearance Of Parties

Interim Orders

30-01-2026
Order

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.

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.

Browse Related Cases

More from this court

JFCM Ramankary All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case