Disposed

Kandathiparambu Sri.Bhuvameswari Devaswm v. P.Ambika

Kerala HC9 Feb 2018RFA/393/2004

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This appeal, arising from a suit, was disposed of based on a settlement mediated by the court. The court fulfilled the compromise where respondents received cheques totaling Rs. 8,00,000/- from appellants, and withdrawal of property attachment was ordered.

What did the court decide?

Appellants to pay Rs. 8,00,000/- via cheques to respondents and withdraw attachment of appellants' property; court fees refunded.

Kandathiparambu Sri.Bhuvameswari Devaswm Vs P.Ambika — Property and Title | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.ABRAHAM MATHEW

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2018 / 20TH MAGHA, 1939

¶5

RFA.No. 393 of 2004

¶6

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN OS 399/1995 OF PRINCIPAL SUB COURT, KOCHI DATED 13-08-2002

¶7

APPELLANT(S)/DEFENDANTS:

¶8

1 KANDATHIPARAMBU SRI BHUVANESWARI DEVASWOM KUMBALANGHI, KOCHI-7, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY OF THE DEVASWOM MANAGING COMMITTEE.

¶9

2 T.P.JOSHI, PRESIDENT OF THE 1ST APPELLANT, DEVASWOM COMMITTEE.

¶10

3 C.N.SIVAN, SECRETARY OF THE 1ST APPELLANT, DEVASWOM COMMITTEE.

¶11

4 T.P.SATHEESH, CONVENOR OF THE 1ST APPELLANT, DEVASWOM TEMPLE FESTIVAL COMMITTEE.

¶12

BY ADVS.SRI.V.V.ASOKAN SRI.K.N.SIVASANKARAN SRI.SUNIL SHANKER

¶13

RESPONDENT(S)/PLAINTIFFS:

¶14

1. P.AMBIKA, W/O LATE RAGHUVARAN RESIDING AT VARIYATH VELI HOUSE, ERAMALLORE P.O.

¶15

2. P.R.SHANMUGHADAS, S/O. LATE RAGHUVARAN, RESIDING AT VARIYATH VELI HOUSE, ERAMALLORE P.O.

¶16

3. V.R.HARI KUMAR, S/O. LATE RAGHUVARAN, RESIDING AT VARIYATH VELI HOUSE, ERAMALLORE P.O.

¶17

4. V.R.RAJESWARI, D/O. LATE RAGHUVARAN, RESIDING AT VARIYATH VELI HOUSE, ERAMALLORE P.O., REPRESENTED BY HER NEXT FRIEND AND GUARDIAN-MOTHER, 1ST APPELLANT P.AMBIKA.

¶18

5. RATNAMMA VELAYUDHAN, D/O. LATE V.A.PADMANABHAN, RESIDING AT POINTHARAPARAMBU, TRIPUNITHURA P.O.

¶19

RFA.No. 393 of 2004

¶20

6. SYAMALA ADISHESHAN,

¶21

D/O. LATE V.A.PADMANABHAN, RESIDING AT PUTHUVAL,

¶22

KAYAMKULAM P.O., KRISHNAPURAM.

¶23

7. USHAKUMARI CHELLAPPAN, D/O. LATE V.A.PADMANABHAN, RESIDING AT KURAVANPARAMBU,

¶24

MUHAMMA P.O., CHERTHALA.

¶25

8. REMADEVI SOMASEKHARAN, D/O. LATE V.A.PADMANABHAN, RESIDING AT MALAPARAMBIL, KARAYAMUTTOM P.O., KOTHAKULAM, BEACH ROAD, TRIPRAYAR

¶26

9. RAJAPPAN,

¶27

PROPRIETOR OF M/S. ANILA SOUND, KUMBALANGHI, KOCHI-7.

¶28

R9 BY ADV. SRI.M.K.CHETTIAR

¶29

R9 BY ADV. SRI.V.K.MOHAMMED YOUSUF R1 TO R4 BY ADV. SRI.R.HARIKRISHNAN R1 TO R4 BY ADV. SRI.E.RAMACHANDRAN

¶30

R1 TO R4 BY ADV. SRI.R.UMASANKAR

¶31

R1 TO R4 BY ADV. SRI.S.SHIV SHANKAR

¶32

THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09-02-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶33

K. ABRAHAM MATHEW, J.

¶34

R.F.A. No. 393 of 2004

¶35

Dated this the 9^th day of February, 2018

¶36

J U D G M E N T

¶37

The parties settled the matter at mediation. Compromise has been filed. I have perused the compromise. I am satisfied that the agreement is lawful. The compromise is recorded.

¶38

In the result, this appeal is disposed of in terms of the compromise as follows;

¶39

a)In full satisfaction of their claim, respondents 1, 4, 5,

¶40

6, 7, 8 and 9 have received from the appellants the cheque bearing No.602205 drawn on the State Bank of Tranvancore, Pazhangad Branch dated 05.02.2018 in favour of the second respondent, P.R.Shanmughadas, for an amount of Rs.4,75,000/(Rupees four lakh and seventy five thousand only) and cheque bearing No.093081 drawn on the Federal Bank, Kumbalangi Branch dated 05.02.2018 in favour of the third respondent, V.R.Harikumar, for an amount

¶41

R.F.A. No. 393 of 2004

¶42

..2..

¶43

of Rs.3,25,000/- (Rupees three lakhs and twenty five thousand only). The cheques have been received by respondents 2 & 3 on behalf of other respondents also. The claim of the decree holders has been fully satisfied.

¶44

b)The attachment of the property of the appellants effected pursuant to the orders passed by the court in the suit is withdrawn.

¶45

The court fees paid by the appellants on the appeal memorandum shall be refunded to the appellants.

¶46

Sd/- K. ABRAHAM MATHEW JUDGE

¶47

bka/

Kandathiparambu Sri.Bhuvameswari Devaswm v. P.Ambika

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kandathiparambu Sri.Bhuvameswari Devaswm v. P.Ambika

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rukku Polymers Vs the Catholic Syrian Bank

K.K.Padmakumar Vs Abraham Eapen

Ratnakaran Vs Prasannakumari

Shafeeq Vs State of Kerala

Satya Narayana Vs Prabha Mony K.K

Sasi Vs Subashini