Jamaludheen Kunju vs Jalal
2021 Latest Caselaw 5442 Ker

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                              PRESENT

         THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANIL KUMAR

 MONDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 26TH MAGHA,1942

                       RSA.No.138 OF 2020

        AS 29/2017 OF DISTRICT COURT, THODUPUZHA

  OS 52/2012 (COUNTER CLAIM) OF SUB COURT, KATTAPPANA


APPELLANT/S:

           JAMALUDHEEN KUNJU
           AGED 64 YEARS
           S/O. SHABUDHEEN KUNJU, BLOCK NO.1217,
           BALAGRAM, KARUNAPURAM VILLAGE, UDEUMBANACHOLA
           TALUK

           BY ADV. SRI.V.VINAR

RESPONDENT/S:

           JALAL
           S/O. AHEMMED KUNJU, EDASSERIL HOUSE,
           THANNIMOODU KARA, PARATHODU VILLAGE, KALLAR P.
           O. - 685 552.

           R1   BY   ADV.   LIJI.J.VADAKEDOM
           R1   BY   ADV.   SRI.RAJEEV JYOTHISH GEORGE
           R1   BY   ADV.   SMT.REXY ELIZABETH THOMAS
           R1   BY   ADV.   SRI.TOM E. JACOB

     THIS REGULAR SECOND         APPEAL HAVING COME UP   FOR
ADMISSION ON 15.02.2021,         THE COURT ON THE SAME   DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 RSA.No.138 OF 2020
                                   ..2..



                              JUDGMENT

Heard.

2. This Regular Second Appeal arises from the

judgment and decree passed in AS No. 29 of

2017 on the file of the District Court,

Thodupuzha dated 18.10.2019, which arose from

the judgment and decree passed in OS No. 52 of

2012 (counter claim) on the file of the Sub

Court, Kattappana dated 31.05.2017.

3. The suit was filed for mandatory as well as

permanent prohibitory injunction that actually

arose from a suit for partition of plaint

schedule property in OS No. 240 of 2010 on the

file of the Munsiff's Court, Kattappana. The

plaintiff sought for partition of plaint

schedule property consisting of 84 cents of

patta land and 50 cents of non-patta land

purchased jointly by the plaintiff and the

defendant. The suit was dismissed with costs RSA.No.138 OF 2020 ..3..

as withdrawn, but the plaintiff contested the

counter claim. The counter claim was allowed,

directing the plaintiff to surrender vacant

possession of the counter claim schedule

property to the defendant and also restraining

him by an order of injunction. The first

appellate court dismissed the appeal,

confirming the judgment and decree of the

trial court. Feeling aggrieved, the

appellant/counter claim respondent/plaintiff

filed this Regular Second Appeal.

4. When the case came up for admission, this

Court directed the parties to appear for

mediation before the Kerala State Mediation

and Conciliation Centre, consequent to which

the dispute is settled, agreeing to give 50%

of the profit to the appellant/counter claim

respondent/ plaintiff as and when the plaint

schedule property is transferred. It is

further agreed by the appellant that he would RSA.No.138 OF 2020 ..4..

vacate the plaint schedule property within one

week from the date of recording of settlement

agreement and both the parties have agreed to

dispose of the suits, viz., OS No.52 of 2012

of the Sub Court, Kattappana and OS No.240 of

2010 of Munsiff's Court, Kattappana, on the

basis of the settlement arrived at between the

parties.

5. Since the parties have settled the dispute

through mediation and the terms of settlement

are in accordance with law, the mediation

agreement stands accepted.

In the result, this Regular Second Appeal

stands disposed of in terms of the mediation

agreement. The terms of mediation agreement

will form part of the decree. Pending

applications, if any, stand disposed of.

Sd/-

N.ANIL KUMAR

JUDGE Bka/15.02.2021