A first appeal under Order XXXI Rule 3 CPC was disposed of as settled out of court. The court accepted a compromise petition where the appellant agreed to pay Rs. 4,00,000 to the respondents to settle the decree in the underlying suit.
Appeal disposed of by recording the out-of-court compromise; full refund of court fee ordered.
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 KERAliA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.SOMARAJAN
TUESDAY, THE Ist DAY OF FEBRUARY 2022 / 12TH MAGHA, 1943 RFA NO. 276 0F 2009 (D)
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 16.09.2008 IN OS No. 46/2004 0F SUB COURT, MANJERI
APPELLANT (DEFENDANT) :
K.M.VARGHESE, S/o MATHAYI, P.O. CIIANDAKKUNNU, NILAMBUR AMSOM DESOM, NII.AMBUR TALUK.
BY ADVS. SRI.T.SETHUMADHAVAN SRI . K. JAYESH MOHANKUMAR SRI . PUSHPARAJAN KODOTH SMT .VANDANA MENON
RESPONDENT (PIAINTIFF) :
1 KIDANGAZHI MANAKKAL NARAYANAN NAMBOODIRIPAD, S/o NARAYANAN NAMBOODIRIPAD, CHATHANcOTTUPURAM AMSOM, ERAMANGALAM DESOM, NILAMBUR TALUK. (DIED, LRs IMPLEADED)
ADDL.R2 K.M.RADHA, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, W/o MADHAVAN NAMBcODIRI, KANGINIYATT MANA, P.O. KADAMPUZHA, MAI.APPURAM DISTRICT, PIN 676553.
ADDL.R3 K.M.YAMUNA, AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, W/o KRISHNAN NAMBOODIRIPPAD, MANGALLOTT ILLOM, DEVI NAGAR, P.O. PUNKKUNNAM, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN 680 002.
ADDL.R4 SREEDEVI, AGED ABOUT 55 YEARS, W/o RISHIKESH, THEKKEDATH MANA, P.O.MUI.ANKKUNNATH KAVU, THRISSUR 680 581.
(LRS OF THE DECEASED SOLE RESPONDENT ARE IMPLEADED AS ADDITIONAL R2 TO ADDITIONAL R4 VIDE ORDER DATED 21.10.2020 IN IA 1/2020)
ADDL.R2 TO R4 BY ADV. SRI.P.M.POULOSE
THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR HEARING ON
01.02.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
RFA No.276 of 2009
-uncRENT
The matter is settled out of court. A compromise petition signed by all the parties and the respective counsel also filed. Hence, the same is accepted. In view of the compromise arrived at by the parties, appeal is not pressed into service. Appeal is disposed of in view of the compromise arrived at by the parties. The compromise arrived at by the parties will form part of the judgment and decree. Refund the entire court fee paid to the appellant in view of the legal position settled by the Apex Court in High Court of .udicature at Madras rep. By its Registrar General v. M.C. Subramaniam and others [2021 (2) KIIC 62]. The Registry is directed to send back the entire records forthwith to the lower court.
Sd/P.SO-EN
JUDGE
Dry-
-2`-
BEFFOR THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF RERALA AT EENANIULAM
IANo.. I of 2022 in
RFANo. 276 of 2009
APPELLFNI: K.M. Varghese, aged 71 years, S/o Mathai Chandhakunnu P.O, Nilambur amsom desom Malappuran District
Vs
RESPONDENTS; (LRs of sole reapondept) +| (1)K.M. Radha, nged67years, W/o Madhavan Namboothiri . Changalliyot Mana, P.O Kadampuzha Malappuram District, PIN: 676 553
(2) K.M.Sreedevi, aged 64 years, W/o Hrishikeshan Bhattathiripad Thekkedath Mana, Kolazhi amsom, Thirur desom P.O Mulamkurmathkavu, Trissur District, PIN: 680 581
tl
(3) K.M. Yamuna, aged 59 years, W/o Krishnan Namboothiri Mangalath illam, Devinagar P.O Punkkumam, Trissur District, PIN:680 002
TIHCOMPORMSEPETITIONFILEDBYTREAPPELLANTANDRESPONDENTS IN TIH ABOVE REGULAR FIRST APPEAL UNDER ORDER Xxxl 11 RULE 3 0F TIH CPC.
The dispute between the appellant and respondents who are the legal heirs
K.M. VARGIHS=.__-i--
K.M.RADRA fa K.M.SREEDEVI -al K.M.YAhENA J€+-i----
u
oftheoriginalplaintiffinOSNo.46/2004onthefileoftheSubCourtManjeri (KidangazhiManakkalNarayananNamboothixpad)hasbeensettledbetweenthe appellant and the respondents. As per the terms of the settlement, appellant has agreedtopayasumofRs.4,00,000/-(RupeesFourlakhsonly)towardsthefull andfinalsettlementofthedecreeamountinOSNo.46of2004SubCourt,Manjeri. Therespondentsreceivedthesettl;mentamountfi.omtheappellanttowardsthe final settlement. The appellant and respondents agreed to produce the above compromisebeforetheHon'bleHighCourtofKeralaforthefinaldisposalof the appeal. On recording the above compormise the appellant may be given refund of the entire court fee paid in the appeal Memorandum.
u
Accordingly the appellant submits that the appeal may be disposed of as settled out of court in terms of the above compormise arrived at between the parties. The court fee paid on the Memorandum of appeal may be kindly be refunded to appellant.
Dated this the 14th day of January, 2022.
KM~vAIGRE2gr
K.M. RADRA #
•v:
K.M.sREEDEv] dr
APPELLANT
ilt ..-,. p - Z,t£-5 -.-- `'!
+e -6L--. >.``-
/zDudy##pHrtyL3EitufoAIATiem##[ois]
CONSEL FOR TIH RESPONDENTS
=eSsdr~ch±±_e€*EFtoife"te=ke+ te"ieeR;NTKBALL@
ADVOCATE ROLL No.. K / 424 / 19CJ3 ---i`iTij^i h^ANNA -6791'£+JJ
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Re. By its Registrar General v. M.C. Subramaniam and others [2021 (2) KIIC 62]Referred¶18
K.M. Varghese
K.M. Radha
K.M. Sreedevi
K.M. Yamuna
P. Somarajan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
