Disposed

K.Balakurup v. B.Retnamma

Kerala HC8 Nov 2022WA/2082/2005

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a review petition and a concurrent writ appeal filed against final judgments in 1991 and 2005. After reviewing the records and noting the significant lapse of time, the Court held that no interference was called for and dismissed the matters.

What did the court decide?

The review petition and writ appeal were disposed of as no interference was called for after a long lapse of time.

K.Balakurup Vs B.Retnamma — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.MANIKUMAR

¶4

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY

¶6

TUESDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 17TH KARTHIKA, 1944

¶7

RP NO. 831 OF 2005

¶8

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN MFA 482/1985 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA

¶9

REVIEW PETITIONER/5TH RESPONDENT:

¶10

K. BALAKURUP,
LEKSHMI NIVAS, VITHURA P.O.,
NEDUMANGAD TALUK.

¶11

BY ADV SRI.PIRAPPANCODE V.S.SUDHIR

¶12

RESPONDENTS/APPELLANT & RESPONDENTS 1 TO 4 & 6:

¶13

1 THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO.LTD., M.G. ROAD, COCHIN-11.

¶14

2 B. RETHNAMMA, RETNA VILAS', PAZHAVADI GRAMAM,, NEDUMANGAD VILLAGE, NEDUMANGAD TALUK.`

¶15

3 K.P. SUMESH, RETNA VILAS', PAZHAVADI GRAMAM,, NEDUMANGAD VILLAGE, NEDUMANGAD TALUK.`

¶16

4 K.P. ANIL KUMAR, RETNA VILAS', PAZHAVADI GRAMAM,, NEDUMANGAD VILLAGE, NEDUMANGAD TALUK.`

¶17

5 BHAGEERATHY AMMA, PARAPPARA MEKKUMKARA PUTHEN VEEDU,, PERAPPARA P.O., VITHURA, NEDUMANGAD.

¶18

R.P.831/05 in M.F.A.482/85 & W.A.2082/05

¶19

¶20

6K. MOHANAN NAIR
KOVIL VILAKATHU VEEDU, CHETTACHAL P.O.,
VITHURA VILLAGE, NEDUMANGAD.

¶21

BY ADVS.
SRI.P.M.KUNJIMOIDEENKUTTY
SRI.LAL K.JOSEPH
SRI.S.A.NAGENDRAN, SR.
SRI.KKM.SHERIF

¶22

THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
08.11.2022, ALONG WITH WA.2082/2005, THE COURT ON THE SAME
DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶23

R.P.831/05 in M.F.A.482/85 & W.A.2082/05

¶24

¶25

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶26

PRESENT

¶27

THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.MANIKUMAR

¶28

¶29

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY

¶30

TUESDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 17TH KARTHIKA, 1944

¶31

WA NO. 2082 OF 2005

¶32

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN OP 14966/1995 OF HIGH COURT OF

¶33

KERALA

¶34

APPELLANT/PETITIONER:

¶35

K.BALAKURUP,
LEKSHMI NIVAS,
VITHURA P.O.,VITHURA VILLAGE,
NEDUMANGAD TALUK.

¶36

BY ADV SRI.PIRAPPANCODE V.S.SUDHIR

¶37

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:

¶38

1 B.RETNAMMA, RETNA VILAS, PAZHAVADI GRAMOM, NEDUMANGAD.

¶39

2 K.P.SUMESH, RETNA VILAS, PAZHAVADI GRAMOM, NEDUMANGAD.

¶40

3 K.P.ANIL KUMAR, RETNA VILAS PAZHAVADI GRAMOM, NEDUMANGAD.

¶41

4 BHAGEERATHI AMMA, PURAPPARA, MEKKUMKARA PUTHEN VEEDU, PERAPPAM P.O., VITHURA, NEDUMANGAD.

¶42

R.P.831/05 in M.F.A.482/85 & W.A.2082/05

¶43

¶44

5 THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LTD. M.G.ROAD, KOCHI-11.

¶45

BY ADVS.
SRI.P.G.GANAPPAN
SRI.T.K.MARTHANDAN UNNITHAN
SRI.S.A.NAGENDRAN SR.
SRI.PREMJIT NAGENDRAN

¶46

THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
08.11.2022, ALONG WITH RP.831/2005, THE COURT ON THE SAME
DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶47

R.P.831/05 in M.F.A.482/85 & W.A.2082/05

¶48

¶49

JUDGMENT

¶50

Dated this the 8^th day of November, 2022

¶51

S.Manikumar, C.J.

¶52

R.P.No.831 of 2005 is filed against the judgment in M.F.A.No.482 of 1985 dated 17.01.1991. Operative portion of the judgment in M.F.A.No.482 of 1985 is reproduced:

¶53

“5. We modify the award by holding that the insurer

¶54

is liable only to the extent of Rs 10,000/ together with interest thereon from date of award till date of first of the deposits made. Out of the amounts deposited in the names of the minors, insurer will be entitled to obtain Rs 40,000/-. The Tribunal shall ensure that this is done. The balance amount of Rs 10,000/- shall continue in the account to the credit of the minors. If any interest has been accrued and not withdrawn, it is open to the guardian of the accumulated minors to withdraw the amount of interest. Interest accumulated shall not be paid to the insurer. The insurer shall be entitled to obtain from the Bank amount deposited in the names of claimants 1 and 4. In other words, the amount awarded less Rs 10,000/- together with interest on the balance amount shall be recovered by the claimants from the driver and owner of the car jointly and severally. The appeal is allowed to this extent. Parties shall bear costs in the appeal.”

¶55

R.P.831/05 in M.F.A.482/85 & W.A.2082/05

¶56

¶57

W.A.No.2082 of 2005 is filed against the judgment in

¶58

O.P.No.14966 of 1995 dated 28.06.2005.

¶59

As both matters pertain to the aspect of grant of interest, they are taken up together.

¶60

Judgment in M.F.A.No.482 of 1985 has been rendered on 17.01.1991. So also, the decision in O.P.No.14966 of 1995 has been rendered on 28.06.2005.

¶61

Going through the material on record, we are of the view that at this length of time, no interference is called for. Accordingly, both the review petition and the writ appeal are disposed of.

¶62

Pending interlocutory applications, if any, shall stand closed.

¶63

Sd/-

¶64

S.Manikumar Chief Justice

¶65

Sd/- Shaji P.Chaly Judge

¶66

vpv

¶67

//true copy//

¶68

P.A. to Judge

K.Balakurup v. B.Retnamma

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Balakurup v. B.Retnamma

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

Sahira, Vs Special Tahsildar (La)

P.K.Markose Vs Uco Bank

Noele John Koshy Vs K. Sanjay Murthy

The Regionalmanager, Vs Bindu Vijayakumar

Balakurup Vs the New India Assurance Co.Ltd.

V.a.Azeez, Proprietor, Selmec Engineering Construction Vs State of Kerala