Kerala High Court
Against The Iit'Dgme}Iit Ai{D ... vs Umadevi & Another Re Spondents/ on 13 January, 2021
IN TEE EIGE COT'RT OF KERAI,A AT ERNAKUI.A}{
PRESEDTT
THE HONOURABLE MR. WSTICE N. AIIIL KU!{AR
IilEDNESDAY, TEE 13TH DAY OF JAbIUARY 2O2L / 23TE POUSEA, L942
RSA.No.254 OF 2018
AGAINST THE iIT'DGME}iIT AI{D DECREE IN AS NO.169/2016 DATED 18-11-20L7
oF I ADDITIONAL DISTRICT COIRT, TEIRIwAI{A!flIEAPIIRN{
AGAINST TgE .I'DGD,GNT A}TD DECREE IN OS NO.133O/2009 OF TBE
ADDITIONAL tdt NSIFF (REIIT COTiITROL COITRT) , TEIRI'VAIIAIIIEAPI'RAM
APPE! Nq11ST DEFE}IDANI :
CETTERAJAYA, AGED 46, D/O.ODdAr{A,
RESIDING AT SILPA,
K. P. 9/365, A.K.G.NAGAR,
KTJDAPPAI{AIGI NNU, PEROORKADA P.O., TETRIryAI{AN':rEAPIIR.AI".
BY ADVS.
SRI.R.T.PRADEEP
SItr.M.BI!{DUDAS
SRI.K.C.EARISE
RESPOI|DEI{TS/Pr,ArNTrFFS 2 S 3 Al{D 3RD DEFEllDAllr:
wnDH/r,w / o.vr.IAYAICUldARjAN NArR,
SREEPADI{AM, KIU![DAli[tzEI,
KITTTTNMELKONAD{, Vrr.,APPrtsAr,A,
TH IRWAIIAI{TEAPURAM- 6 9 5 5 7 3 .
slvr v.u.,s /o.vr,tAYArcttldARjAtil NAIR'
SREEPADf'tAld, KU!|DA}I(IZET,
KUTTINMELKONAIT4' VILAPPILSALA'
TE IRT'VANATiITEAPI'RAI{- 6 9 5 5 7 3 .
3 OD{AIIA,W/O.KRTSENAN,
RESIDING AT SILPA,
K. P. 9 /365, A.K.G.NAGAR,
KUDAPPAT{AKI'NNU, PEROORKADA P .O .
'
TH IRWAI{AIiITEAPI'RN{- 5 9 5 O O 5 .
R1 BY ADVS. SRI.dIELSON \'.EDEMPADAI{
ST.fi .A.MEGEA
SRI . PIRJAPPAI{CODE \/. S. ST'DEIR
rEIS REGUL,AR SECOIID APPEiAL EAVING BEEN E INALLY HEARD ON
13.01 .202L, THE COttRT ON TEE SaME DAY DELTVERED TEE FOLLOWTNG:
RSA.No.264 OE-2018
,T|JDGMENT
Dated this the 13'r' day of ilanuary 2O2L
Both the appellant and respondents filed a compromise'
The compromise is recorded and the suit stands dismissed in
terms of the compromise. The terms of the compromise will form
part of the judgment.
sd/-
N-ANITL r(uMAR, JUDGE
dlV$.or.2o2r
./'
.r\ x ,.
ry/
Presented on'. 5 I 1 12021
BEFORE THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
l.A. No. I I
of 2021
tn
R.S.A. No.26412018 ?
Chithrajaya Petitioner/APPellant
Vs.
Umadevi & another Re spondents/ResPondents
APPI-ICATION IARE THE COMPROI4]SE]JN
NULEq OT CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE
,4ffiX
,.:l o s.ltgtrrrt
5.11il toel
R.T. PRADEEP (P 275)
BINDUDAS. M (8704) (Ks2
&
K.C. HARISH (H 302) (K 788t2O17)
S.R.Law Charnbers, Niranjanam,
Cross Road-ll, Kannachanthode Road, Cochin-1
Counsel for the Petitioner/Appellant
A"t
Rr*'6, q, fr,l)'u
a4t|>a."9 J x
%turffi,x
D,J)
e-
P
"t"^ r"lte
/ *J.*t-
"l I l--- <>*-J ; [^*-
hr^'r[-', t'h d
'o'
fr,ln "-J'--(tl*
C-- [,:*. f'1L'J
w -lro < o
a--', 1
6Jt ltzt
D*14 L Luv, "( +
vz4\vilr" 4 4 /,
ffi r(,[uq
o
b.-. .-'J
$$ffi:;
BEFORE THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
I
l.A. No. I of 2021
tn
R.S.A. No.26412018
Chithrajaya : Petitioner/Appellant
Vs.
Umadevi & another : Respon dents/Respondents
INDEX
Sl. No. Particulars Paqes
1. Affidavit 1-2
2. Compromise Petition dated 5.12.2020 3-4
signed by appellant and respondents 1 & 2.
Dated this the 6n dty of January,2021
F,t-
Counsel for the Petitioner/Appellant
BEFORE THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
l.A. No. \ of 2021
in
R.S.A. No. 26412018
Chithrajaya Petitioner/Appellant
Vs.
Umadevi & another Respon dents/Respondents
AFFIDAVIT
l, Chithrajaya, aged 48, Dlo. Omana, residing at Silpa, K-P.9/365,
A. K.G. Nagar, Kudappanakunnu, Peroorkada. P.O., Thiruvananthapuram,
do hereby solemnly affirm and state as follows:
1. I am the appellant in the Regular Second Appeal. I know the facts of
the case.
Z. lwas the 1't defendant in the suit. The suit is filed for putting up of
boundary on the western and north - western sides of plaint 'A' schedule
property separating it from plaint 'B' schedule property, to declare
plaintiff's title over plaint'A' schedule and to recover possession from the
defendants and for a permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the
defendants from trespassing into the property.
3. During the pendency of the R.S.A., the matter was settled betvtreen
the parties and the compromise petition delineating the terms and
conditions entered between myself and respondents No.1 & 2 dated
5.12.2020 is produced herewith. The R.S-A. may be disposed of by
.d\:"w
passing a compromise decree on recording the compromise between the
parties.
4. Hence it is humbly prayed to dispose of the R.S.A. by recording the
terms of compromise.
All the facts stated above are true and correct to the best of my
knowledge, information and belief.
Dated this the 6tn day of January ,2021
Solemnly affirmed and signed by the deponent who is personally known to
me in my office at Ernakulam on this the t*n day of January,2021.
BEFORE THE HONOURABLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA
R.S.A NO. 264101g
Appellant Chithrajaya
Respondents 1. Uma Devi
2. Sivi.V.U
compromise Petition filed between chithrajaya, shilpa, D.N.A 661, A.K Nagar
Junction, Peroorkada P.O, Trivandrum the appellant and (1) Smt. Umadevi,
w/o vijayakumaran, residing at vp 169(A), sreepadmam, Kundamuzhi,
Kuttilmelkonam, vilappilsala, Trivandrum (21 sivi. V.U, vp 16g(A),
Sreepadmam, Kundamuzhi, Kuttilmelkonam, Vilappilsala, Trivandrum
Respondents 1 & 2 respectively.
The original suit is one for declaration of title, possession and interest
over plaint A' schedule property and for recovery of possession of the building
therein. The Trial Court in O.S No. 1330/09 decreed the suit in terms of the
plaint and the appeal preferred by the original defendants as A.S No. L6g /L6
was dismissed by the Hon'lole District Court, Thiruvananthapuram. Against the
judgement and Decree of the Appellate court the original defendant filed second
appeal before the Hon'ble District Court and the same is pending disposal.
While so the Appellants and the respondents had discussed the dispute
in the presence of mediators and they have arrived at a compromise on the
following
Terms
1. Though the original plaintiff vijayakumaran Nair who is no more had
purchased plaint A' schedule property by virtue of Exbt Al sale Deed,
the original defendants were continuing their residence in the building
within the same. Considering continued residence of the original
defendants (Anpellants in this appeal) the additional plaintiffs
(respondents in this appeal) had agreed to relinguish their right over the
said propert5r on receiving an amount of Rs.10 lakhs from the present
Appellant as consideration.
2. On the basis of the said compromise Appellant had paid an amount of
Rs.10 lakhs to the respondents through Bank transfer from the account
q
of the Appellant in Esaf Bank, Mannanthala Branch to the account of the
additional 3'd respondent in his account at Canara Bank, Puthenchantha
Branch.
On the basis of the said payment the Respondents (original additional
plaintiffs 2 & 3) hereby relinguish their claim over plaint A' schedule
property and they do not want any relief on the basis of the decree
passed by the Trial Court and the Appellate Court.
4. In these circumstances the Respondents (original additional plaintiffs 2
&3) have no objection in allowing the appeal, dismissing the original suit
as O.S No. 1330/09 as not pressed.
5. The respondents as legal representatives of original plaintiff shall
executed a release deed in favour of appellant in the respect to plaint
schedule property.
Hence it is prayed that the compromise be accepted and the appeal
be disposed off accordingly.
Dated this the Sth day of December 2O2O
P-+/"\
P-.i'Pnof"ol
Advocate '.
Kltq+(1 V
I Appellant ry
fu^ tu
Advocate Respondents
.5.u.n^oJ,g,,
qf
?
-t'\'1\
.r' t '(Jdh}av
,
'
*3tv\.vq
