Two first appeals were disposed of because the parties reached an amicable settlement via a compromise petition filed under Order XXIII Rule 3 CPC, satisfying the Court that issues were adjusted and no further pursuit was intended.
Both appeals were disposed of in terms of the settlement entered in the compromise petition filed under Order XXIII Rule 3 CPC.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MARY JOSEPH
FRIDAY, THE 05TH DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 14TH PHALGUNA, 1942
RFA.No.663 OF 2004(A)
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE IN OS 311/1997 DATED 29-03-2004 OF PRINCIPAL SUB COURT,IRINJALAKUDA
APPELLANTS/DEFENDANTS 1 TO 4:-
1 NARAYANA MENON S/O.MULLAPPILLY THANKAM @ PADMAVATHY AMMA & THEROPPILLY RAMAN NAIR, MURINGOOR DESOM, KALLUR VADAKKUMMURI VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK (REPRESENTED THROUGH POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER.)
2 MOHANDAS S/O.MULLAPPILLY THANKAM @ PADMAVATHY AMMA & THEROPPILLY RAMAN NAIR, -DO-,-DO-
3 REGHUNANDANAN
S/O.MULLAPPILLY THANKAM @ PADMAVATHY AMMA & THEROPPILLY RAMAN NAIR -DO- DO- (REPRESENTED THROUGH POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER.)
4 VALSALA D/O MULLAPPILLY THANKAM @ PADMAVATHY AMMA & THEROPPILLY RAMAN NAIR, -DO- -DO(REPRESENTED THROUGH POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER)
BY ADV.
SRI.K.G.BALASUBRAMANIAN
APPELLANTS 2 TO 4 REPRESENTED BY POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER 1ST APPELLANT. NEW POWER OF ATTORNEY IS ENTERED VIDE ORDER DATED 22.02.2021 IN I.A 3/2021.
APPELLANT NO.1 IS REPRESENTED BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER AND WIFE SHEELA W/O MULLAPILLY NARAYANA MENON, AGED 60, RESIDING AT MURINGOOR DESOM, MURINGOOR P.O., 680309, KALLUR VADAKKUMMURI VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT.
RFA.No.308 OF 2005 2
RFA.No.663 OF 2004(A) &
APPELLANT NO.3 IS REPRESENTED BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER AND WIFE SINDHU, W/O MULLAPILLY REGHUNANDANAN, AGED 52, RESIDING AT THEROPPILLY HOUSE, ANJANA NIVAS, NEAR CONVENT, ANNANADU P.O., 680309, KALLUR VADAKKUMMURI VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT.
APPELLANT NO.4 IS REPRESENTED BY HER POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER AND HUSBAND GOVINDAN PULICKAL, S/O MANGALATH GOVINDANKUTTY MENON, AGED 65, RESIDING AT ARCHANA NIVAS, MURINGOOR DESOM, MURINGOOR P.O.,680309, KALLUR VADAKKUMMURI VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT.
APPELLANTS 1,3 AND 4 ARE REPRESENTED THROUGH SEPERATE POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDERS AS PER ORDER DATED 22.02.2021 IN IA 3/2021.
RESPONDENTS/PLAINTIFFS & 5TH DEFENDANT:-
1 SARASWATHI W/O RAVI, KOOTUNGAL HOUSE, CHERUVALUR DESOM & P.O., KALLUR VADAKKUMMURI VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK.
2 JAYASREE W/O.SURYAKUMAR POONATHARA VEEDU, KOODAPUZHA DESOM, KIZHAKKE CHALAKUDY VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK.
3 KOCHUNARAYANAN S/O THEROPPILLY BHARATHY AMMA, MURINGOOR P.O., MURINGOOR VADAKKUMMURI VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK.
R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR)
THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22-02-2021, ALONG WITH RFA.308/2005, THE COURT ON 05-03-2021 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
RFA.No.663 OF 2004(A) & RFA.No.308 OF 2005 3
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MARY JOSEPH
FRIDAY, THE 05TH DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 14TH PHALGUNA, 1942
RFA.No.308 OF 2005
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE IN OS NO.27/1996 DATED 29.03.2004 OF PRINCIPAL SUB COURT,IRINJALAKUDA
APPELLANTS/PLAINTIFFS:
1 SARASWATHI D/O MULLAPPILLY THANKAM @ PADMAVATHIAMMA KOOTTUNGAL HOUSE, KALLUR, VADAKKUMMURI VILLAGE,CHERUVALLUR DESOM, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK.
2 JAYASREE, D/O MULLAPPILLY THANKAM @ PADMAVATHIAMMA, POONOOTHARA HOUSE, KOODAPPUZHA DESOM, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK.
BY ADV. SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR)
RESPONDENTS/DEFENDANTS:
1 SINDHU, W/O RAGHUNANDANAN, MULLAPPILLY HOUSE, MURINGOOR DESOM, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK.
RFA.No.663 OF 2004(A) & RFA.No.308 OF 2005 4
BY ADV. SRI.K.G.BALASUBRAMANIAN
THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22-02-2021, ALONG WITH RFA.663/2004(A), THE COURT ON 05-03-2021 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
RFA.No.663 OF 2004(A) & RFA.No.308 OF 2005 5
JUDGMENT
[ RFA.663/2004, RFA.308/2005 ] Dated this the 5th day of March, 2021
The parties to the above appeals have proved to the satisfaction of this Court by filing a compromise petition as I.A.No.1 of 2021 that the issues involved in the suit among them have been adjusted wholly on arriving at certain terms amicably. The terms of amicable settlement have been incorporated in the compromise petition and signed by the 2nd appellant and power of attorney holders of appellants 1, 3, 4 and respondents. In that event, they submit that the appeals are not intended to be pursued with any further.
In the result, both appeals are disposed of in terms of settlement entered in the compromise petition filed under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The compromise petition shall form part of the judgment. Half of the court fee shall be refunded to the respective parties entitled for that in the appeals.
Sd/-
MARY JOSEPH
JUDGE
MJL
1 issue framed by the court
whether appeals filed against judgment and decree ought to be disposed of based on a filed compromise petition.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
NARAYANA MENON & ORS.
SARASWATHI & ORS.
MARY JOSEPH
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
