Kerala High Court
Sukumaran vs Sarojini on 8 April, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
THURSDAY, THE 08TH DAY OF APRIL 2021 / 18TH CHAITHRA, 1943
RSA.No.1160 OF 2003
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN AS 133/2000 DATED 30-08-2003 OF
PRINCIPAL SUB COURT,ERNAKULAM
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN OS 1450/1997 DATED 08-12-1998 OF
PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF COURT, ERNAKULAM
APPELLANTS:
1 SUKUMARAN,
S/O.IKKORAN,KANIVEETTIL HOUSE,
UDAYATHUMVATHIL KUMBALAM VILLAGE,
P.O.PANANGAD,KANAYANNUR TALUK,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. (DIED)
2 SAROJINI (DIED)
W/O.SUKUMARAN,
-DO- -DO-
(APPELLANTS 3 TO 6 ARE RECORDED AS LEGAL
REPRESENTATIVES OF DECEASED APPELANT NO.2 AS PER
ORDER DATED 24.2.2021 IN IA.1/2021)
3 SAJAN,
S/O.SUKUMARAN,
-DO- -DO-
4 SANTHOSH,
S/O.SUKUMARAN,
-DO- -DO-
5 ADDL. BABY,
D/O.LATE SUKUMARAN,
KANIVEETTIL HOUSE,
UDAYATHUMVATHIL KUMBALAM VILLAGE,
P.O.PANANGAD,KANAYANNUR TALUK,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.
6 ADDL. MINI,
D/O.LATE SUKUMARAN,
KANIVEETTIL HOUSE,
UDAYATHUMVATHIL, KUMBALAM VILLAGE,
P.O.PANANGAD,KANAYANNUR TALUK,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.
RSA.No.1160 OF 2003
2
APPELLANTS 2 TO 4 ARE RECORDED AS THE LEGAL
REPRESENTATIVES OF DECEASED 1ST APPELLANT AND
ADDITIONAL APPELLANTS 5 AND 6 ARE ALSO IMPLEADED AS
LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES OF DECEASED 1ST APPELLANT AS
PER ORDER DATED 26.09.2005 IN I.A.1829/2005.
BY ADVS.
SRI.N.SUBRAMANIAM
SRI.P.T.GIRIJAN
SRI.M.S.NARAYANAN
SRI.PRAMODH.R
SMT.USHA NARAYANAN
SRI.C.MURALIKRISHNAN (PAYYANUR)
SRI.ABRAHAM GEORGE JACOB
SHRI.AKSHAY R
RESPONDENTS:
1 SAROJINI,(DIED)
W/O.LATE K.K.VELAYUDHAN,KANIVEEDU,
UDAYATHUMVATHIL,KUMBALAM VILLAGE,
P.O.PANANGAD,KANAYANNUR TALUK,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.
2 MAYA,
D/O.LATE K.K.VELAYUDHAN,
-DO- -DO-
3 SINDHU,
D/O.LATE K.K.VELAYUDHAN,
-DO- -DO-
4 PRAKASHAN,(DIED)
S/O.LATE K.K.VELAYUDHAN,
-DO- -DO-
5 REMA,
D/O.LATE K.K.VELAYUDHAN,
-DO- -DO-
6 ADDL.MANI T.V.,(ADDL.R6 AND R7 SOUGHT TO BE
IMPLEADED)
W/O.LATE PRAKASHAN, AGED 35, THOTTUMPURATH (H),
PERINJANAM P.O., KOTTAMKULAM, AYILAMKAVU,
KODUNGALLOOR, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-680 686.
7 ADDL.PREEMA PRAKASH,
AGED 3 YEARS,D/O.LATE PRAKASHAN, THOTTUMPURATH (H),
RSA.No.1160 OF 2003
3
PERINJANAM P.O., KOTTAMKULAM, AYILAMKAVU,
KODUNGALLOOR, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-680 686,
REPRESENTED BY MOTHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN
MANI T.V.
THE LEGAL HEIRS OF DECEASED FOURTH RESPONDENT ARE
IMPLEADED AS ADDITIONAL RESPONDENTS 6 AND 7 AS PER
ORDER DATED 04.04.2019 IN I.A. NO.3/2019.
THE DEATH OF R1 AND R4 IS RECORDED AS PER ORDER
DATED 04.04.2019 IN MEMO DATED 05.11.2018.
R1 BY ADV. SRI.S.SREEKUMAR
R2-3, R5-7 BY ADV. SRI.P.MARTIN JOSE
R2-3, R5-7 BY ADV. SRI.P.PRIJITH
R2-3, R5-7 BY ADV. SRI.THOMAS P.KURUVILLA
THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
08.04.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
RSA.No.1160 OF 2003
4
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
===================
RSA No. 1160 OF 2003
===================
Dated this the 8th day of April 2021
JUDGMENT
This regular second appeal is filed by the defendants
in OS No.1450/1997 on the file of the Principal Munsiff
Court, Ernakulam. It was a suit filed by the respondents
herein for declaration and injunction. The trial court after
considering the entire evidence dismissed the suit. The
plaintiffs in the suit had preferred A.S.164/2000 before
the District Court, Ernakulam against the judgment and
decree dated 08.12.1998 in O.S.No.1450/1997, which
was made over to the Sub Court, Ernakulam and re-
numbered as A.S.No.133/2000. The Sub Court,
Ernakulam as per the impugned judgment allowed the
appeal and decreed the suit as prayed for. Aggrieved by
the same, this regular second appeal is filed.
RSA.No.1160 OF 2003
2. When this appeal came up for consideration,
both parties submitted that, the entire dispute between
the parties are settled out of court and a compromise
petition under Order XXIII Rule 3 of Code of Civil
Procedure is filed. The subject matter of the appeal has
been settled between the parties as per the settlement in
the following manner:-
"1) The appellants hereby admit that the
respondents have right of easement by
prescription over the plaint B schedule
pathway in O.S.No.1450 of 1997 of
Munsiff's Court, Ernakulam as ingress
and egress to plaint 'A' schedule
property.
2) The property of the appellants including
plaint 'B' schedule property is situated
in re.Sy.No.117/18 and 117/9 in Block
No.16 of Kumbalam Village.
3) The appellants hereby provided a
pathway having a width of 90 cms and
a length of 20 meters starting from the
M.L.A. road on the west passing
through the northern boundary of
RSA.No.1160 OF 2003
Re.Sy.No.117/9 owned by the
appellants and reaching the south
western corner of the plaint A schedule
property as an ingress and egress to
plaint A schedule property to be used
by the respondents and their
successors in interest. The said
pathway provided by the appellants as
a substitute to the plaint B schedule
pathway as decreed by the Sub Court,
Ernakulam in A.S.No.133 of 2000 and
the respondents hereby agree to
accept the same as a substitute for
plaint 'B' schedule pathway with all
rights as per the decree in Appeal
A.S.No.133 of 2000.
4. The parties hereby agree that the
appellants and respondents have every
right to use the said pathway referred
to in Clause No.3 and the appellants
and respondents hereby agree that
each of them will not create any
obstruction to the user of the said
pathway by the other or their
successors in interest.
RSA.No.1160 OF 2003
5. In view of the above said pathway
provided by the appellants, the
respondents hereby relinquish their
right over the plaint B schedule
pathway. The respondents hereby
agree that they will not make any claim
of pathway over the plaint B schedule
pathway over the plaint B schedule
pathway in future as they have been
provided with substituted pathway as
referred to in Clause 3 and 4 above.
6. A sketch showing the pathway newly
provided to the respondents in
substitute to the B schedule pathway is
produced along with the compromise
and the sketch shall form part of the
decree.
7. In the above circumstances it is just
and necessary to record the above
compromise and pass a decree in
terms of the above compromise
without any order as to costs."
3. I perused the compromise entered into
between the parties. I think, the same can be accepted
RSA.No.1160 OF 2003
and a decree can be passed in accordance to the
compromise.
Therefore, the regular second appeal is disposed of,
recording the compromise entered into between the
parties. The compromise filed before this Court will form
part of the decree. Parties will obey decree. The
impugned judgment and decree is set aside.
(Sd/-)
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
JUDGE
LU
