Disposed

Prasanth Mohan Das v. Saranya Sasi

Kerala HC2 Jul 2021CO/25/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala disposed of an appeal and a cross objection filed in a matrimonial matter. The parties had participated in mediation where all disputes, including those in connected matters, were resolved. The recorded compromise agreement superseded the impugned decree.

What did the court decide?

Appeal and cross objection disposed of by recording the compromise agreement which supersedes the impugned decree.

Prasanth Mohan Das Vs Saranya Sasi — Matrimonial and Divorce | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE

¶4

¶5

THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH

¶6

FRIDAY, THE 2^ND DAY OF JULY 2021 / 11TH ASHADHA, 1943

¶7

MAT.APPEAL NO. 894 OF 2020

¶8

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN OP 119/2015 OF FAMILY COURT, THIRUVALLA, PATHANAMTHITTA DATED 27.07.2019

¶9

APPELLANT/PETITIONER:

¶10

SARANYA SASI AGED 32 YEARS D/O.LATE SASI, PRAKKATTU MANNATHU HOUSE, KEEZHVAIPUR P.O., KEEZHVAIPUR MURI, MALLAPPALLY VILLAGE, MALLAPPALLY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT.

¶11

BY ADV P.S.PRADEEP

¶12

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS 1, 3 AND 4:

¶13

1 PRASANTH MOHAN DAS AGED 37 YEARS S/O.LATE MOHAN DAS, KUNNAMPALLIL HOUSE, ANAPRAL MURI, THALAVADI P.O., THALAVADI VILLAGE, KUTTANADU TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN-689572.

¶14

2 RAJAMMA MOHAN DAS, AGED 55 YEARS W/O.LATE MOHAN DAS, KUNNAMPALLIL HOUSE, ANAPRAL MURI, THALAVADI P.O., THALAVADI VILLAGE, KUTTANADU TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN-689572.

¶15

Mat.Appeal No.894/2020 & Cross Objection No.25/2021

¶16

-:2:-

¶17

3 KEERTHI MOHAN DAS, AGED 35 YEARS D/O.LATE MOHAN DAS, KUNNAMPALLIL HOUSE, ANAPRAL MURI, THALAVADI P.O., THALAVADI VILLAGE, KUTTANADU TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN-689572.

¶18

BY ADVS. SRI.M.V.THAMBAN SRI.R.REJI SMT.THARA THAMBAN SRI.B.BIPIN SRI.ARUN BOSE

¶19

THIS CROSS OBJECTION/CROSS APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02.07.2021, ALONG WITH CO.25/2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

Mat.Appeal No.894/2020 & Cross Objection No.25/2021

¶21

-:3:-

¶22

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶23

PRESENT

¶24

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE

¶25

¶26

THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH

¶27

FRIDAY, THE 2^ND DAY OF JULY 2021 / 11TH ASHADHA, 1943

¶28

CO NO. 25 OF 2021

¶29

IN Mat.Appeal 894/2020 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA

¶30

CROSS OBJECTORS/RESPONDENTS 1 TGO 3/RESPONDENTS 1, 3 AND 4:

¶31

1 PRASANTH MOHAN DAS AGED 38 YEARS S/O. MOHAN DAS, KUNNAMPALLIL HOUSE, ANAPRAL MURI, THALAVADI P.O, THALAVADI VILLAGE, KUTTANADU TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.

¶32

2 RAJAMMA MOHAN DAS, AGED 56 YEARS KUNNAMPALLIL HOUSE, ANAPRAL MURI, THALAVADI P.O, THALAVADI VILLAGE, KUTTANADU TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.

¶33

3 KEERTHI MOHAN DAS, AGED 36 YEARS D/O. LATE MOHANDAS, KUNNAMPALLIL HOUSE, ANAPRAL MURI, THALAVADI P.O, THALAVADI VILLAGE, KUTTANADU TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.

¶34

BY ADVS. M.V.THAMBAN SRI.R.REJI SMT.THARA THAMBAN SRI.B.BIPIN

¶35

Mat.Appeal No.894/2020 & Cross Objection No.25/2021

¶36

-:4:-

¶37

RESPONDENT/APPELLANT/DEFENDANT:

¶38

SARANYA SASI AGED 34 YEARS D/O. LATE SASI, PRAKKATTU MANNATHU HOUSE, KEEZHVAIPUR P.O, KEEZHUVAIPUR MURI, MALLAPPALLY VILLAGE, MALLAPPALLY TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN 689 587

¶39

BY ADV P.S.PRADEEP

¶40

THIS CROSS OBJECTION/CROSS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02.07.2021, ALONG WITH Mat.Appeal.894/2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶41

Mat.Appeal No.894/2020 & Cross Objection No.25/2021

¶42

-:5:-

¶43

J U D G M E N T

¶44

Dated this the 2^nd day of July, 2021

¶45

A.Muhamed Mustaque,J.

¶46

This appeal arises from the judgment and decree in O.P.NO.119/2015 on the files of the Family Court, Thiruvalla dated 27.7.2019. The appellant was the petitioner. The appellant has approached this Court having not satisfied with the decree granted in her favour. The respondents also have filed Cross Objection 25/2021.

¶47

Pending the appeal, parties were referred for mediation. In mediation, parties have resolved all disputes including the dispute pending in connected matters. In the light of the settlement, we dispose of the appeal and cross objection recording the compromise. The compromise agreement shall form part of the judgment and supersede the impugned decree and judgment.

¶48

Sd/-

¶49

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, JUDGE

¶50

Sd/-

¶51

DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, JUDGE

¶52

Prasanth Mohan Das v. Saranya Sasi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prasanth Mohan Das v. Saranya Sasi

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

Jinesh K.P. Vs Jomisha

Janeesh K.P. Vs Jomisha

Jomisha K.C Vs Janeesh K.P

Jabeen Ihsan Vs Noushima Basheer

Nijo Antony Vs Nil

Tony Thomas Vs v.P.Joy