Allowed

Manmadan Pillai v. Achuthan Pillai

Kerala HC4 Mar 2024RSA/924/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In RSA No. 924 of 2016, the Kerala High Court granted the appellant's request to withdraw the regular second appeal. The court noted the unilateral withdrawal application and applied specific precedents to deny refund of court fees, dismissing the appeal accordingly.

What did the court decide?

The regular second appeal was dismissed as withdrawn, and the refund of court fee application was dismissed.

Manmadan Pillai Vs Achuthan Pillai — Civil Procedure and Limitation | Kerala HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A. BADHARUDEEN

¶4

MONDAY, THE 4^TH DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 14TH PHALGUNA, 1945

¶5

RSA NO. 924 OF 2016

¶6

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 29.02.2016 IN AS NO.186 OF 2014 OF ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COURT- IV, KOLLAM

¶7

ARISING OUT OF THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 30.08.2014 IN OS

¶8

NO.617 OF 2012 OF SUB COURT, KARUNAGAPPALLY

¶9

APPELLANT/APPELLANT/PLAINTIFF:

¶10

MANMADAN PILLAI S/O KUTTAN PILLAI, AGED 63 YEARS, CHERIYIL VEEDU, PALACKAL MURI, THEVELAKKARA VILLAGE, KARUNAGAPPALLY TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT.

¶11

BY ADV SRI.B.KRISHNA MANI

¶12

RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/DEFENDANT:

¶13

ACHUTHAN PILLAI S/O KUTTAN PILLAI, AGED 65 YEARS, RESIDING AT KANJIYIL VEEDU, PALACKAL MURI, THEVELAKKARA VILLAGE, KARUNAGAPPALLY TALUK, KOLLAMDISTRICT-690524.

¶14

THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04.03.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

RSA NO. 924 OF 2016

¶16

¶17

JUDGMENT

¶18

Dated this the 4^th day of March, 2024

¶19

This regular second appeal has been filed under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, challenging the decree and judgment dated 29.02.2016 in A.S.No.186/2014 on the files of the District Court-IV, Kollam, arose out of the decree and judgment dated 30.08.2014 in O.S.No.617/2022 on the files of the Sub Court, Karunagappally. Appellant herein is the plaintiff in the Suit.

¶20

The learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the matter has been settled between the parties, out of court, and seeks permission to withdraw this regular second appeal. Permission is granted. Accordingly, this regular second appeal stands dismissed as withdrawn.

¶21

On 27.02.2024, the appellant has filed I.A.No.1 of

¶22

2024, an application under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, to record the compromise arrived at

¶23

RSA NO. 924 OF 2016

¶24

¶25

between the parties, but the same is not a joint petition or joint statement filed by both parties to see the out of court settlement and the same is a petition unilaterally filed by the appellant. Thus on no stretch of imagination, this appeal to be recorded as disposed of in terms of compromise.

¶26

Therefore, the appellant/plaintiff is not entitled to refund of the court fee paid on the Memorandum of Regular Second Appeal as per the ratio in High Court of Judicature at Madras vs. M.C. Subramaniam & ors [(2021) 3 SCC 560] and Noorudheen V. Muhammed Najmal (2021 (4) KHC 257) .

¶27

All interlocutory applications pending in this regular second appeal stand dismissed.

¶28

Registry shall inform this matter to the trial court as well

¶29

as the appellate court for information and future guidance.

¶30

Sd/-

¶31

A. BADHARUDEEN JUDGE

¶32

nkr

Manmadan Pillai v. Achuthan Pillai

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manmadan Pillai v. Achuthan Pillai

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Krishnankutty Vs Sivashankara Pillai, (Dead)

Sivasankaran, Vs Unnikrishnan

Abdullakutty Vs State of Kerala

Velukuttan Vs Ammini Gopalan

Vasanthan Sikhamani Balsalam Vs City Corporation of Thiruvananthapuram

Hassan Khader Vs Sainul Abdeen