Disposed

Xavier @ Kunjappan v. Xavier

Kerala HC4 Jun 2012RSA/275/2005

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This appeal challenging a prior civil decree was finally disposed of by recording a settlement reached during mediation. The court accepted the memorandum and passed a substituted decree embodying the terms regarding property possession, monetary payment, and boundary wall construction.

What did the court decide?

Settlement recorded; original judgment and decree substituted by a decree in terms of the settlement agreement; appeal disposed of with appellant directed to withdraw.

Xavier @ Kunjappan Vs Xavier — Partition | Kerala HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH

¶4

MONDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF JUNE 2012/14TH JYAISHTA 1934

¶5

RSA.No. 275 of 2005 ( ) ----------------------AS.26/2001 of ADDL.SUB COURT, KOCHI OS.1/1999 of PRL.MUNSIFF COURT, KOCHI

¶6

APPELLANT/RESPONDENT/DEFENDANT:

¶7

XAVIER ALIAS KUNJAPPAN, AGED 54, S/O. BAPPU, RESIDING IN MALIAKKAL HOUSE PERUMPADAPPU DESOM, PALLURUTHY VILLAGE KOCHI TALUK.

¶8

BY ADV. SMT.M.P.MARY

¶9

RESPONDENTS/APPELLANTS/PLAINTIFFS:

¶10

*1. XAVIER, AGED 76 YEARS, (DIED. LRS IMPLEADED) S/O. LONAN, RESIDING IN KATTISSERY HOUSE, 20/2766-A PERUMPADAPPU DESOM,PALLURUTHY VILLAGE, KOCHI TALUK.

¶11

KATHREENA, AGED 42 YEARS,

¶12

D/O. XAVIER, RESIDING IN 20/2760-B

¶13

PERUMPADAPPU DESOM, PALLURUTHY VILLAGE, KOCHI TALUK.

¶14

ADDL. RESPONDENTS:

¶15

ADDL R3. ANTONY, S/O.LATE XAVIER, AGED 40 RESIDING AT KATTISSERY HOUSE NEAR PASHNITHODU BRIDGE EDAKOCHI

¶16

ADDL R4. THOMAS, S/O.LATE XAVIER, AGED 38 RESIDING AT KATTISSERY HOUSE 20/2766-A, PERUMPADAPPU DESOM PALLURUTHY VILLAGE, KOCHI TALUK

¶17

ADDL R5. JOHNSON, S/O.LATE XAVIER RESIDING AT KATTISSERY HOUSE 20/2766-A, PERUMPADAPPU DESOM PALLURUTHY VILLAGE, KOCHI TALUK

¶18

(The LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES OF DECEASED 1^st RESPONDENT ARE IMPLEADED AS ADDL. RESPONDENTS 3 TO 5 AS PER ORDER DTD. 13/8/07 IN I.A.NO.105/06.)

¶19

BY ADV. SRI.PEEYUS A.KOTTAM

¶20

THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04-06-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

THOMAS P. JOSEPH, J.

¶22

R.S.A.No.275 of 2005

¶23

Dated this 04^th day of June, 2012

¶24

JUDGMENT

¶25

Defendant in O.S.No.1 of 1999 of the Court of learned Principal Munsiff, Kochi has preferred this appeal challenging the judgment and decree of learned Additional Sub Judge, Kochi in A.S.No.26 of 2001.

¶26

This appeal was sent to the Mediation Centre. The Mediator has reported that the dispute is settled between the parties in accordance with the memorandum of settlement signed by the parties and the counsel for respondents. Learned counsel for the appellant has now signed the memorandum of settlement in open Court.

¶27

I have heard counsel on both sides. Having regard to the settlement, I am inclined to allow the request to record the settlement.

¶28

Resultantly this second appeal is disposed of as under:

¶29

(i) The settlement reached between the parties vide memorandum of mediation settlement dated 25.05.2012 is accepted and recorded.

¶30

(ii) In substitution of the judgment and decree of learned Additional Sub Judge, Kochi in A.S.No.26 of 2001 and of learned Principal Munsiff, Kochi in A.S.No.1 of 1999, a decree is passed in terms of the settlement as under:

¶31

R.S.A.No.275 of 2005

¶32

-: 2 :-

¶33

(i) Appellant Xavier @ Kunjappan have agreed to give the pathway in dispute with three 1.0 (one metre) width and 15.00 (fifteen Meters) length, at northern boundary, from north to south. This pathway will be given to the respondent in their joint names for a amount of `.90,000/- (Rupees Ninety Thousand Only), the deed will be registered at the cost of the respondents, on or before 15^th of June 2012.

¶34

(ii) As a part of settlement an amount of `.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand Only) will be given to the appellant by the respondents towards the cost of the construction of the boundary wall on the eastern boundary of the appellant, by utilizing the above amount, appellant will construct the boundary wall.

¶35

(iii) On 17/12/2010 the respondents herein have already given an amount of .40,000/- (Rupees Forty Thousand Only) to the appellant and the balance amount of .60,000/- (Rupees Sixty Thousand Only) (.50,000/- + .10,000/-) received today by the appellant from the respondents towards the full and final settlement of the settlement agreement. On the basis of this settlement agreement all issues in connection with the above case has been amicably settled by the parties and appellant hereby agree to withdraw the above appeal.

¶36

The memorandum of settlement shall form part of the decree of this Court.

¶37

(THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE)

¶38

Sbna/-

Xavier @ Kunjappan v. Xavier

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Xavier @ Kunjappan v. Xavier

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

Unnikrishnan Vs Gopalakrishnan

Raghavan Vs Francis Joseph

S. Sreedharan Vs the Kottayam Rubber Marketing Co-Op

Amina Vs Madhavi @ Thankamani Amma

N.Nagappan Vs Prasanth.M.Nair

K.S. Pavanan Vs Vijayakumar