Allowed

Bhargavi Andarjanam v. Kunnimadathilath Krishnan Namboodiri

Kerala HC29 Nov 2010AFA/28/2002

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Cases from appellants Bhargavi Andarjanam and 5 other respondents were settled via compromise. The High Court accepted the settlement to resolve disputes over property allotment set out in their petition.

What did the court decide?

Decree passed setting aside previous judgments/decrees; Plot B to appellant; Plot A to respondents jointly; Deposit amount paid to appellant.

Bhargavi Andarjanam Vs Kunnimadathilath Krishnan Namboodiri — Partition | Kerala HC (2010)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. BHAVADASAN

¶4

MONDAY, THE 29TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 8TH AGRAHAYANA 1932

¶5

AFA.No. 28 of 2002()

¶6

------------------AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN AS.214/1997 IN OS.114/93 of SUB COURT, QUILANDY

¶7

APPELLANT / APPELLANT/PLAINTIFF:

¶8

--------------------------------------------------------

¶9

BHARGAVI ANDARJANAM, VENGATTOOR KOTTOOR MANAKKAL, CHALASSERY AMSOM, ALIKKARA DESOM, OTTAPALAM TALUK.

¶10

BY ADVS. SRI.N.L.KRISHNAMOORTHY SRI.K.LAKSHMINARAYANAN SMT.DEEPA G. PAL

¶11

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS/DEFENDANTS 2 & 4:

¶12

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

¶13

1. KUNNIMADATHILLATH KRISHNAN NAMBOODIRI, CHEMMANCHERY AMSOM, KOLAKKAD DESOM, KOYILANDY TALUK. (DIED)

¶14

2. KUNNIMADATHILLATH MADHUSOODANAN NAMBOODIRI, CHEMMANCHERY AMSOM, KOLAKKAD DESOM, KOYILANDY TALUK. (DIED)

¶15

*RESPONDENT NO.2 DIED & THE APPELLANT IS RECORDED AS THE SOLE LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT AS PER ORDER DATED 21.10.2010 IN I.A. 1433/10

¶16

**ADDITIONAL RESPONDENTS 3 TO 7 IMPLEADED

¶17

**3. RAJESHSWARI THAMBURAN, W/O. LATE KUNNIMADATHILLATH KRISHNAN NAMBOODIRI, PALACE NO. 6, THRIPUNITHURA, ERNAKULAM, PIN-682301.

¶18

**4. GEETHA VARMA, D/O. LATE KUNNIMADATHILLATH KRISHNAN NAMBOODIRI, PALACE NO. 6, THRIPUNITHURA, ERNAKULAM, PIN – 682 301.

¶19

**5. SREEKUMAR KRISHNAN, S/O. LATE KUNNIMADATHILLATH KRISHNAN NAMBOODIRI, PALACE NO. 6, THRIPUNITHURA, ERNAKULAM, PIN – 682 301.

¶20

...2/-

¶21

AFA.No. 28 of 2002() -2-

¶22

**6. HAREENDRAN, S/O. LATE KUNNIMADATHILLATH KRISHNAN NAMBOODIRI, PALACE NO. 6, THRIPUNITHURA, ERNAKULAM, PIN – 682 3O1.

¶23

****7. RAJAGOPAL KRISHNAN, S/O. LATE KUNNIMADATHILLATH KRISHNAN NAMBOODIRI, PALACE NO.6, THRIPUNITHURA, ERNAKULAM, PIN – 682 301. (*DIED)

¶24

**LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES OF DECEASED FIRST RESPONDENT IMPLEADED AS ADDITIONAL RESPONDENTS 3 TO 7 AS PER ORDER DATED 29/11/2010 IN I.A. NO. 2490/2003.

¶25

***ADDITIONAL RESPONDENT NO.7 DIED & THE 3RD RESPONDENT IS RECORDED AS THE LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ADDL. 7TH RESPONDENT VIDE JUDGMENT DATED 29/11/2010 IN AFA 28/2002.

¶26

R1 BY ADVS. SRI.K.A.MAYANKUTTY MATHER

¶27

SRI.V.V.ASOKAN R2 BY ADV. SRI.P.K.RAVI KRISHNAN R3 TO R7 BY ADV. SRI. V.V. ASOKAN

¶28

THIS APPEAL FROM FIRST APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶29

¶30

THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN & P. BHAVADASAN, JJ.

¶31

- - - - A.F.A. No. 28 of 2002

¶32

- - - - Dated this the 29th day of November, 2010.

¶33

JUDGMENT

¶34

Bhavadasan, J,

¶35

The suit was one for enforcement of an agreement and

¶36

also for partition. The suit was dismissed. The plaintiff filed A.S. 214 of 1997 before this court. In the appeal, the judgment and decree of the trial court was confirmed. Thereafter this AFA has been filed.

¶37

During the pendency of this appeal the second

¶38

respondent died and so also the first respondent. Their legal heirs have been brought on the party array. During the pendency of this appeal, the seventh respondent also died and third respondent is recorded as his legal representative.

¶39

The parties have filed a compromise petition, wherein

¶40

they have mentioned that all the disputes between them have been

¶41

AFA.28/2002. 2

¶42

settled and a compromise has been entered into and they pray that a decree be passed in terms of the compromise. They point out that a final decree may be passed in terms of the compromise.

¶43

Accepting the compromise, a decree is passed in the following terms:

¶44

i) The judgments and decrees of the two courts are set aside.

¶45

ii) Plot B (southern section in the plan attached to the compromise petition), which is valued by the mediators at Rs.One Lakh will stand allotted to the appellant herein and Plot A (northern section) which is valued by the mediators at Rs.One Lakh will stand allotted to respondents 3 to 6 in this appeal jointly.

¶46

iii) The compromise petition as well as the plan attached thereto shall form part of the decree.

¶47

iv) A final decree is thus passed directing the trial court in O.S. 114 of 1993 to seek remittance of the stamp duty and also to engross the final decree on the stamp papers, if the parties pay the requisite amount.

¶48

AFA.28/2002.

¶49

¶50

v) The amount lying in deposit will be paid to the

¶51

appellant herein.

¶52

Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, Judge

¶53

P. Bhavadasan, Judge

¶54

sb.

¶55

Clause iv in page 2 of the judgment dated 29/11/2010 in A.F.A.28/2002 reading “A final decree is thus passed directing the trial court in O.S.114/1993 to seek remittance of stamp duty and also to engross the final decree on the stamp papers, if the parties pay the requisite amount.” is corrected and substituted as “A final decree is passed on the above terms. The parties are directed to remit the amount required for stamp papers or produce stamp papers before this court as required under Rule 236 of the Civil Rules of Practice. Copy of the decree will be forwarded to the Sub Registrar, Chemmanchery in Quilandy Taluk. Certified copies of the decree will be issued to the parties on payment of copying charges.” as per order dated 18/03/2011 in memo dated 03/03/2011 in A.F.A.28/2002.

¶56

Sd/Registrar (Judicial)

Bhargavi Andarjanam v. Kunnimadathilath Krishnan Namboodiri

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhargavi Andarjanam v. Kunnimadathilath Krishnan Namboodiri

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K.R.Dinesh Kumar Vs Shakeela

M/S.Patel Swa Mill and Others Vs Johnson Kanadan & Others

C.U.Salamon Vs the Sub Inspector of Police and Others

.Chellamma Vs M/S.Sundaram Finance

A.Zeenath Vs a.Laila and Others

A.v.Shafeeque Vs K.T.Muhammed Ali