The High Court of Kerala disposed of the first appeal which challenged an order passing an agreement between parties for the removal of specific items from a property by the respondent. The court upheld the parties' agreement.
The appeal was disposed of as per the agreed order dated 09/11/2022 where the respondent removes specified items.
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 MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE
&
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN
WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 18TH KARTHIKA,
1944
FAO NO. 38 OF 2022
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 21/2/2022 IN I.A.NO.2/2021 IN O.S.NO.220/2021 OF IST ADDITIONAL SUB COURT, ERNAKULAM
APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS/PLAINTIFFS:
1 JAYARAM B.BHAT, AGED 56 YEARS, S/O.S.BALAKRISHNA BHAT, H.NO. VIII/569(A), T.D. EAST NADA, RAMESWARAM WEST MURI, KOCHI - 682002.
2 SEETHALAKSHMI BHAT, AGED 79 YEARS, (DIED) W/O. S. BALAKRISHNA BHAT, H.NO. VIII/569(A), T.D. EAST NADA, RAMESWARAM WEST MURI, KOCHI - 682002., REP.BY HER SON & POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER, JAYARAM B BHAT.
ADDL.A3 BALAKRISHNA BHAT, AGED 80 YEARS, S/O.SREENIVASA BHAT, H.NO.VIII/569(A), T.D.EAST NADA, RAMESWARAM WEST MURI, KOCHI-682002, REPRESENTED BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER, JAYARAM.B.BHAT.
**** THE LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE DECEASED ORIGINAL 2ND APPELLANT IS IMPLEADED AS ADDITIONAL 3RD APPELLANT AS PER ORDER DATED 27/06/22 IN IA 2/22 IN FAO 38/22****
BY ADVS. DINESH R.SHENOY A.JOSEPH GEORGE EBIN MATHEW P.ROHIT PREMANANDAN SHENOY SILESH S. PRABHU SWATHI R. KRISHNAN
FAO No.38/2022 2
RESPONDENT(RESPONDENT/DEFENDANT):
MRS.SURAYYA, AGED 49 YEARS, W/O.SHIRAZ, M/S.SYLCON, OLD NO.38/1404, (NEW NO.40/6950), CORPORATION OF COCHIN, NEAR PADMA THEATRE, M.G.ROAD, ERNAKULAM.
BY ADVS. SRI.REJI GEORGE BINOY DAVIS(K/1254/2012) NASEER MOIDU(K/367/2004) SAISANKAR.S(K/002188/2021)
THIS FIRST APPEAL FROM ORDERS HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09.11.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
FAO No.38/2022 3
JUDGMENT
A.Muhamed Mustaque, J .
This appeal was filed challenging the order in
I.A.No.2/2021 in O.S.No.220/2021 on the file of
the 1st Additional Sub Court, Ernakulam.
The parties have agreed to the following orders:
The respondent will remove all items in the
Commission Report except the glass facade, staircase and tiles fixed. The Advocate
Commissioner appointed in the matter shall
facilitate the respondent in removing those items in his presence, after giving notice to both sides. The Advocate Commissioner is also to be paid a sum of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees five thousand only) as Commission Batta. Needful shall be done in the matter within two weeks.
The appeal is disposed of as above.
Sd/-
A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, JUDGE Sd/SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN, JUDGE
ln
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the agreed orders regarding removal of items from the Commission Report were correctly passed by the lower court.
Jayaram B. Bhat
Seethalakshmi Bhat
Balakrishna Bhat
Mrs. Surayya
A.Muhamed Mustaque
Shoba Annamma Eapen
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
