Dismissed

Sobhanakumari v. State Bank of Travancore,Valakuzhy Br

Kerala HC1 Nov 2017RFA/492/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

RFA No.492 of 2011 filed against a decree for realization of a sum was disposed of after the appellant submitted that the dispute was settled out of court by paying the bank. The court dismissed the appeal and condoned the delay, ordering a refund of half the court fee.

What did the court decide?

The appeal and the condonation application disposed of as settled; half of the court fee refunded to appellant.

Sobhanakumari Vs State Bank of Travancore,Valakuzhy Br — Execution and Attachment | Kerala HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN

¶4

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

¶6

WEDNESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF NOVEMBER 2017/10TH KARTHIKA, 1939

¶7

RFA.No. 492 of 2011 ( )

¶8

AGAINST THE DECREE/JUDGMENT IN OS 103/2003 of SUB COURT, THIRUVALLA DATED 31-03-2006

¶9

APPELLANT/2ND DEFENDANT:

¶10

SOBHANAKUMARI, AGED 53 YEARS, W/O.RAJAN, NADUKKEPARAMBIL HOUSE, EZHUMATTOOR P.O.,, MALLAPPALLY.

¶11

BY ADVS.SRI.P.HARIDAS SMT.S.SIKKY

¶12

RESPONDENTS/PLAINTIFF/1ST DEFENDANT:

¶13

1. STATE BANK OF TRAVANCORE, VALAKUZHY BRANCH, REPRESENTED BY ITS BRANCH MANAGER- 689 544.

¶14

2. MRS.SINDHU SATHEESAN, W/O.LATE MR.V.T.SATHEESAN,, VALIYATHARAYIL HOUSE, EZHUMATTOOR P.O.,, MALLAPPALLY TALUK - 689 586.

¶15

R1 BY ADV.SRI.P.SANTHOSH MATHEW, SC, SBT

¶16

THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01-11-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

VPV

¶18

P.N.RAVINDRAN & DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, JJ.

¶19

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= R.F.A.No.492 of 2011 & C.M.Appln.No.962 of 2011

¶20

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

¶21

Dated this the 1^st day of November, 2017

¶22

JUDGMENT

¶23

P.N.Ravindran, J.

¶24

R.F.A.No.492 of 2011 arises from the decree and judgment passed by the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Thiruvalla on 31.3.2006 in O.S.No.103 of 2003. The appellant is the second defendant therein. By the impugned judgment, the suit instituted by the first respondent bank for realisation of the sum of Rs.2,49,315/with interest and costs was decreed. This appeal was presented in this court on 20.7.2011 with a delay of 1793 days. The appellant has filed C.M.Appln.No.962 of 2011 to condone the said delay.

¶25

When the application to condone delay in filing the appeal came up for consideration today, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the dispute between the parties has been settled out of court. Learned counsel submitted that the appellant has paid to the plaintiff bank the sum of Rs.4,15,000/- towards full and final satisfaction of the decree.

¶26

In the light of the said submission, this appeal and the application to condone delay in filing the appeal are disposed of as

¶27

R.F.A.No.492 of 2011

¶28

-:2:-

¶29

settled out of court. One-half of the court fee paid on the memorandum of appeal shall be refunded to the appellant in terms of the decision of the Full Bench of this court in Sukumaran Nair v. Special Tahsildar (2009 (4) KLT 342). It will be open to the parties to move the court below to have the order of attachment lifted after recording full satisfaction of the decree. It will also be open to the parties to move the court below for return of documents if any produced by them.

¶30

Sd/-

¶31

P.N.RAVINDRAN JUDGE

¶32

Sd/-

¶33

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE

¶34

/true copy/

¶35

P.A. to Judge

¶36

vpv

Sobhanakumari v. State Bank of Travancore,Valakuzhy Br

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sobhanakumari v. State Bank of Travancore,Valakuzhy Br

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Joshi Vs Chinnamma

Sindhu K.K. Vs E.v.Narayani

M.L.Thilikan Vs Sakthan Kuries and Loans Pvt.Ltd.

Indira R.Pillai @ Indiramma, Rep.by Power of Attorney Holder, Ramachandran Pillai Vs the Federal Bank Ltd.

Arumughan Vs Joy Mathew

State of Kerala Vs P.E.Balachandran