Dismissed

Kolothumthodi Musthafa v. Yakkiparamban Pathumma

Kerala HC14 Jun 2018Mat.Appeal/388/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed the matrimonial appeal challenging a final partition decree. The court held the appeal was not maintainable as the final decree was passed based on a commission report to which both parties submitted they had no objection, rendering it effectively a consent decree.

What did the court decide?

Appeal dismissed; final partition decree stands upheld.

Kolothumthodi Musthafa Vs Yakkiparamban Pathumma — Partition | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.HARILAL &

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.M.BABU

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF JUNE 2018 / 24TH JYAISHTA, 1940

¶5

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN OP 436/2006 of FAMILY COURT, MALAPPURAM DATED 12-08-2008

¶6

APPELLANT(S)

¶7

KOLOTHUMTHODI MUSTHAFA AGED 47 YEARS, S/O.VEERANUNNI, THAITHODIKA KUNIYIL, KEEZHUPARAMBA AMSOM, AREACODE VIA,, KEEZHUPARAMBA P.O.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.K.SHIBILI NAHA

¶9

SMT.A.LOWSY

¶10

RESPONDENT(S):

¶11

YAKKIPARAMBAN PATHUMMA,D/O.MARAKKARUTTI THAITHODIKA, NELLARU, CHEEKKODU AMSOM, CHEEKKODU PO, ERANADU TALUK,CHERUVAYOOR VIA.

¶12

R BY ADV. SRI.BABU S. NAIR

¶13

THIS MATRIMONIAL APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14-06-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

K.HARILAL & A.M.BABU, JJ.

¶15

--------------------------Mat.Appeal No.388 of 2009 --------------------------Dated 14^th June, 2018

¶16

JUDGMENT

¶17

K.Harilal, J.

¶18

This appeal has been filed challenging the final decree for partition passed in I.A No.2116/2007 in O.P No.436/2006 on the files of the family court, Malappuram.

¶19

Heard the learned counsel for the appellant.

¶20

It is not disputed that the preliminary decree has attained finality and a commission was appointed to effect partition in accordance with the preliminary decree and the commissioner has submitted her report, plan and connected records after effecting partition in accordance with the preliminary decree. When the case was posted for objection, no objection was filed and when the case was taken up for hearing, the parties have submitted that they have no objection to the commission report and they are satisfied with the commission report and final decree can be passed in terms of the preliminary decree. In view of the submissions made at the bar, the family court passed final decree in terms of the preliminary decree on the basis of the commission report to which no objection was filed by the parties. Thus, prima facie, it appears

¶21

¶22

Mat.Appeal No.388 of 2009

¶23

that preliminary decree has been passed on the consent of both parties. It is needles to say, the appeal is not maintainable against

¶24

a consent decree. We do not find any reason to disbelieve the observations recorded by the family court.

¶25

In the above view, this appeal will stand dismissed.

sd/-

K.HARILAL Judge

sd/-

A.M.BABU Judge

sks/14.6.2018

Kolothumthodi Musthafa v. Yakkiparamban Pathumma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kolothumthodi Musthafa v. Yakkiparamban Pathumma

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

Diocese of Cochin Vs Jama-at Mosque

Jayanthi @ Jayanthi R.Ganesh Vs v.Raghu Ganesh

Sreedevi Vs Manoj & Others

Thankachan Vs Jessy Thankachan

Gireesh Vs Aswathi

Dr.Stanly.S Vs Mareena Mini