This judgment dismissed an appeal and cross objection against a final decree. The court held that legal impacts not considered in the preliminary decree cannot be raised at the final decree stage and dismissed the cross objection based on estoppel. Both appeals and cross objection were dismissed.
Appeal and cross objection dismissed. No costs.
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 P.SOMARAJAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF MARCH 2023 / 1ST CHAITHRA, 1945
RFA NO. 205 OF 2021
AGAINST THE FINAL DECREE DATED 21.12.2020 IN O.S.NO.125/2008 OF
SUB COURT,ATTINGAL
APPELLANTS/RESPONDENTS/DEFENDANTS 1 AND 2:
1JYOTHISH KUMAR,
AGED 61 YEARS,
S/O. LATE BHASKARAN,
JYOTHI BHAVAN, KUNNUMMEL,
PAZHAYAKUNNUMMEL VILLAGE,
KILIMANOOR
2VINOD,
S/O. LATE BHASKARAN,
JYOTHI BHAVAN, KUNNUMMEL,
PAZHAYAKUNNUMMEL VILLAGE,
KILIMANOOR
BY ADV P.K.MUHAMMED
RESPONDENT/PETITIONER/PLAINTIFF:
B. CHITHRA,
D/O.LATE BHASKARAN,
’KALABHAM’, KALLINGAL, NAGAROOR,
PRESENTLY RESIDING AT GEETHA BHAVAN,
MULLARAMCODU, VADASSERIKONAM P.O, OTTOOR VILLAGE,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 143
BY ADV G.S.REGHUNATH
THIS CROSS OBJECTION/CROSS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR HEARING ON
22.03.2023, ALONG WITH CO.35/2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
2
RFA Nos.205/2021, CO NO. 35 OF 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.SOMARAJAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF MARCH 2023 / 1ST CHAITHRA, 1945
CO NO. 35 OF 2022
AGAINST THE FINAL DECREE DATD 21.12.2020 IN O.S.NO.125/2008 OF SUB COURT, ATTINGAL
CROSS OBJECTOR/RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF IN O.S:
B. CHITHRA, AGED 52 YEARS,
D/O. LATE BHASKARAN, 'KALABHAM',
KALLINGAL, NAGAROOR,
PRESENTLY RESIDING AT GEETHA BHAVAN, MULLARAMCODU,
VADASSERIKONAM P.O., OTTOOR VILLAGE,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 143
BY ADV G.S.REGHUNATH
RESPONDENTS/APPELLANTS/DEFENDANTS IN O.S:
1JYOTHISH KUMAR,
AGED 61 YEARS,
S/O. LATE BHASKARAN,
JYOTHI BHAVAN, KUNNUMMEL,
PAZHAYAKUNNUMMEL VILLAGE, KILIMANOOR,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 601
2VINOD,
S/O. LATE BHASKARAN,
JYOTHI BHAVAN, KUNNUMMEL,
PAZHAYAKUNNUMMEL VILLAGE, KILIMANOOR,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 601
BY ADV P.K.MUHAMMED
THIS CROSS OBJECTION/CROSS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR HEARING
ON 22.03.2023, ALONG WITH RFA.205/2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
3
RFA Nos.205/2021, CO NO. 35 OF 2022
JUDGMENT
The defendant came up with an appeal against the
final decree passed on the reason that the legal
impact of Section 25 of the Hindu Succession Act was
not considered at the stage of the passing of the
preliminary decree. The abovesaid objection was
rejected by the trial court presumably on the ground
that no appeal was preferred against the preliminary
decree and that it has attained finality.
Necessarily, the said question is not amenable for
consideration at the final decree stage. The
preliminary decree which attained finality and
conclusiveness cannot be reopened at the stage of
final decree. Hence, the appeal fails, dismissed.
The Cross Objection was filed on the reason that
initially the property was given to the possession of
the defendant 1 and 2 by appointing them as party
receiver with a condition that they should pay an
amount of Rs.4,000/- (Rupees Four thousand only) by
4
RFA Nos.205/2021, CO NO. 35 OF 2022
way of mesne profit. Subsequently, the defendants were
removed and the plaintiff was appointed in their place
based on their consent on an undertaking that she
would pay at the rate of Rs.15,000/-(Rupees Fifteen
thousand only). The Cross Objection is against the
acceptance of the said amount. The plaintiff was
appointed as the party receiver with the abovesaid
liability. Hence, she would stand estopped by her
conduct in the payment of the said amount so long as
she hold the status of party receiver. Hence, Cross
Objection also fails and will stand dismissed. In
the result appeal and cross objection will stand
dismissed. No costs.
Sd/-
P.SOMARAJAN
JUDGE
rkr-22/03/23
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the legal impact of Section 25 of the Hindu Succession Act can be considered at the stage of passing the final decree.
Whether a cross objection filed against the acceptance of mesne profit should be allowed when the plaintiff was appointed party receiver with a liability to pay such amount.
Whether the preliminary decree which attained finality can be reopened at the stage of final decree.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Jyothish Kumar
Vinod
P. Somarajan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court