Kerala High Court
Babu Abraham vs Saji Abraham on 20 January, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANIL KUMAR
WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021/30TH POUSHA, 1942
RSA.No.97 OF 2017
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT & DECREE IN AS 12/2016
DATED 18-06-2016 OF DISTRICT COURT, PATHANAMTHITTA
OS 241/2012 DATED 23-12-2015 OF MUNSIFF'S COURT, RANNY
APPELLANTS/APPELLANTS/PLAINTIFFS:
1 BABU ABRAHAM,
AGED 48,
S/O.ABRAHAM,
ALUNKAL CHUZHUKUNNEL HOUSE,
NJOOZHOOR MURI, AYROOR VILLAGE,
RANNY TALUK, PIN CODE-689 672.
2 RACHEL ROY,
AGED 42,
W/O.ROY,
ODOLOIL HOUSE,
KURIYANNUR MURI,
KOLABHAGOM.P.O.,
THOTTAPPUZHASSERRY VILLAGE,
THIRUVALLA TALUK, PIN CODE-689 672.
BY ADVS.
SRI.P.VISWANATHAN (SR.)
SRI.SUNIL N.SHENOI
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS 1 & 2/DEFENDANTS 1 & 2:
1 SAJI ABRAHAM,
AGED 40,
S/O.ABRAHAM,
ALUNKAL CHUZHUKUNNEL HOUSE,
NJOOZHOOR MURI, AYROOR VILLAGE,
RANNY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT,
PIN CODE-689 672.
I.A.No.1/2020 in R.S.A.No.97/2017,
R.S.A.Nos.97, 108 & 342 of 2017
..2..
2 ANSU,
AGED 30,
W/O.SAJI ABRAHAM,
ALUNKAL CHUZHUKUNNEL HOUSE,
NJOOZHOOR MURI, AYROOR VILLAGE,
RANNY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT,
PIN CODE-689 672.
3 ABRAHAM,
AGED 86,
S/O.V.M.ABRAHAM,
ALUNKAL CHUZHUKUNNEL HOUSE,
NJOOZHOOR MURI, AYROOR VILLAGE,
RANNY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT,
PIN CODE-689 672.
4 SUJA VARGHESE,
AGED 46,
W/O.VARGHESE,
CHAKALAVADAKEYIL HOUSE,
THOMBIKANDAM.P.O, EDAMURY, RANNY,
PIN CODE -689 673.
R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI.JACOB.P.ALEX
R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI.JOSEPH.P.ALEX
R4 BY ADV.SRI.MANU SANKAR.P.
THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON 19-01-2021, ALONG WITH RSA.108/2017, RSA.342/2017, THE
COURT ON 20-01-2021 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
I.A.No.1/2020 in R.S.A.No.97/2017,
R.S.A.Nos.97, 108 & 342 of 2017
..3..
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANIL KUMAR
WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021/30TH POUSHA, 1942
RSA.No.108 OF 2017
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT & DECREE IN AS 10/2016
DATED 18-06-2016 OF DISTRICT COURT, PATHANAMTHITTA
OS 243/2012 DATED 23-12-2015 OF MUNSIFF'S COURT, RANNY
APPELLANT/APPELLANT/DEFENDANT:
BABU ABRAHAM,
AGED 48,
S/O.ABRAHAM,
ALUNKAL CHUZHUKUNNEL HOUSE,
NJOOZHOOR MURI,
AYIROOR VILLAGE,
RANNY TALUK, PIN CODE- 689 672.
BY ADVS.
SRI.P.VISWANATHAN (SR.)
SRI.SUNIL N.SHENOI
RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF:
SAJI ABRAHAM,
AGED 37,
S/O.ABRAHAM,
VARIKKANIKUZHIYIL HOUSE,
ALUNKAL CHUZHUKUNNEL) HOUSE, NJOOZHOOR MURI,
AYIROOR VILLAGE, RANNY TALUK,
PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN CODE - 689 672.
BY ADV. SRI.JACOB P.ALEX
BY ADV. SRI.JOSEPH P.ALEX
THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON 19-01-2021, ALONG WITH RSA.97/2017, RSA.342/2017, THE
COURT ON 20-01-2021 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
I.A.No.1/2020 in R.S.A.No.97/2017,
R.S.A.Nos.97, 108 & 342 of 2017
..4..
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANIL KUMAR
WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021/30TH POUSHA, 1942
RSA.No.342 OF 2017
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT & DECREE IN AS 11/2016
DATED 18-06-2016 OF DISTRICT COURT, PATHANAMTHITTA
OS 205/2012 DATED 23-12-2015 OF MUNSIFF'S COURT, RANNY
APPELLANT/APPELLANT/DEFENDANT:
ABRAHAM,
AGED 86 YEARS,
S/O.LATE ABRAHAM,
VARIKKANIKUZHIYIL HOUSE, NJOOZHOOR MURI,
AYROOR VILLAGE, RANNY TALUK,
PIN CODE - 689 672, NOW RESIDING AT
ODOLOLIL HOUSE, KURIYANNUR MURI,
KOLABHAGOM.P.O., THOTTAPPUZHASSERY VILLAGE,
THIRUVALLA TALUK, PIN CODE - 689 672.
BY ADVS.
SRI.P.VISWANATHAN (SR.)
SRI.SHIBU JOSEPH
SRI.SUNIL N.SHENOI
RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF:
SAJI ABRAHAM,
AGED 37, S/O.ABRAHAM,
VARIKKANIKUZHIYIL HOUSE, (ALUNKAL
CHUZHUKUNNEL) HOUSE, NJOOZHOOR MURI,
AYROOR VILLAGE, RANNY TALUK,
PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN CODE - 689 672.
BY ADV. SRI.JACOB P.ALEX
BY ADV. SRI.JOSEPH P.ALEX
THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON 19-01-2021, ALONG WITH RSA.97/2017, RSA.108/2017, THE
COURT ON 20-01-2021 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
I.A.No.1/2020 in R.S.A.No.97/2017,
R.S.A.Nos.97, 108 & 342 of 2017
..5..
JUDGMENT
R.S.A.No.97/2017 arises from the judgment and
decree dated 18.6.2016 passed in A.S.No.12/2016 on the
file of the District Court, Pathanamthitta which arises from
the judgment and decree dated 23.12.2015 passed in
O.S.No.241/2012 on the file of the Munsiff's Court, Ranny.
2. Appellants and respondents 1 and 4 are the
children of the 3rd respondent in the above appeal. The 2 nd
respondent is the wife of the 1 st respondent. The
appellants are plaintiffs in O.S.No.241/2012 on the file of
the Munsiff's Court, Ranny. The parties are hereinafter
referred to as the appellants and respondents according to
their status in R.S.A.No.97/2017 unless otherwise stated.
3. O.S.No.241/2012 was tried jointly with
O.S.No.205/2012 and O.S.No.243/2012 respectively. By
judgment dated 23.12.2015, the learned Munsiff declared
the title of the 1st respondent over the plaint schedule
I.A.No.1/2020 in R.S.A.No.97/2017,
R.S.A.Nos.97, 108 & 342 of 2017
..6..
property having an extent of 76.77 ares comprised in
Sy.No.226/4 of Ayroor Village based on Ext.A1 settlement
deed No.157/2009 of Aranmula Sub Registry. The learned
Munsiff further declared that Ext.A3 cancellation deed
No.1640/2011 and Ext.A4 sale deed No.306/2012 of
Aranmula Sub Registry as null and void.
4. Challenging the aforesaid judgments and
decrees in O.S.No.241/2012, O.S.No.205/2012 and
O.S.No.243/2012, the appellants and 3rd respondent filed
A.S.No.10/2016, A.S.No.11/2016 and A.S.No.12/2016
respectively before the District Court, Pathanamthitta. As
per the common judgment and decree dated 18.6.2016
the learned District Judge dismissed the appeals
confirming the judgments and decrees passed by the trial
court. Resultantly, the plaintiffs and defendants filed
R.S.A.No.97/2017, R.S.No.108/2017 and R.S.A.No.342/2017
challenging the judgments and decrees in
I.A.No.1/2020 in R.S.A.No.97/2017,
R.S.A.Nos.97, 108 & 342 of 2017
..7..
A.S.Nos.10/2016, 11/2016 and 12/2016 respectively of
the District Court, Pathanamthitta.
5. When the second appeals have come up for
hearing, the learned counsel for the appellants and
respondents submit that they filed I.A.No.1/2020 under
Order XXIII Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure to pass a
decree in terms of the compromise entered into between
the parties.
6. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants
and the learned counsel for the respondents.
7. It is stated in the compromise petition that the
1st respondent along with his mother, late Aleyamma filed
W.P.(C)No.27874/2012 before this Court, challenging the
order passed by the RDO and Maintenance Tribunal,
Thiruvalla, cancelling transfer of registry of decree
schedule property mutated in the name of the 1 st
respondent, on the request of the 3 rd respondent. It is
I.A.No.1/2020 in R.S.A.No.97/2017,
R.S.A.Nos.97, 108 & 342 of 2017
..8..
further stated that the appellants and the respondents
have settled their disputes in the above appeal and
connected appeals along with W.P.(C)No.27874/2012 in
accordance with the terms of the compromise. On a
perusal of the terms of the compromise, this Court is
satisfied that the terms are in accordance with law. Hence
the compromise is recorded. The terms of the compromise
shall form part of the decree.
In the result, I.A.No.1/2020 in R.S.A.No.97/2017
stands allowed. The terms of the compromise will form
part of the decree. Thus, R.S.A.No.97/2017,
R.S.A.No.108/2017 and R.S.A.No.342/2017 are disposed
of in terms of the compromise which will form part of the
decree. There will be no order as to costs.
Sd/-
N.ANIL KUMAR,
JUDGE
skj
N
' R/g'
/\\
/"
Presented on: 21 -12-2020
BEFORE THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAN'I
l.A.No. I\t of 2020
in
R.S.A. No. 97 of 2017
Babu Abraham and another Appellants
Vs.
SajiAbraham and others Respondents
COMPROMISE PETITION FILED UNDER ORDER XX|IT RULE 3 OF THE
.o\/
U6f.';
t{'s" -A
1x' epry-W
W Nr )-^
(, COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANTS:
4ffi
suNfl N. SHENOT (5-2709) W80t2012
GOUNSEL FOR REPSONDENTS 1.2 AND 4:
-._-*lrAcoB P. ALEX (J-821) K/355/2000
I i:rt"d P. ALEX (J-975) Kj1-Ct2002
j 1 \)t[?t?t \r,no*u
sANKAR p.Kts2st2ols
BEFORE THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
I
l.A.No. of 2020
R.S.A. No.
I
IN
97 of 2017
w
PETTION E RS/APPE LLANTS :
1. Babu Abraham, aged 52, S/o.Abraham, Alunkal Chuzhukunnel
House, Njoozhoor Muri, Ayroor Village, Ranny Taluk, PIN 689 612.
2. Rachel Roy, aged 46, Wo.Roy, Odoloil House, Kuriyannur Muri,
Kolabhagom P.O, Thottappuzhassery Village, Thiruvalla Taluk, PIN
689 545.
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:
1. Saji Abraham, aged 44, S/o. Abraham, Alumkal Chuzhukunnel House,
Njoozhoor Muri, Ayroor Village, Ayroor North PO, Ranny Taluk,
Pathanamthitta District. PIN 689 612
2. Ansu, aged 38, Wo. Saji Abraham, Alumkal Chuzhukunnel House,
Njoozhoor Muri, Ayroor Village, Ayroor North PO, Ranny Taluk,
Pathanamthitta District. PIN 689 612.
3. Abraham, aged 90, S/o. V.M. Abraham, Alunkal Chuzhukunnel
House, Njoozhoor Muri, Ayroor Village, Ranny Taluk, Pathanamthitta
District, PIN 689 612.
4. Suja Varghese, aged 50, Wo. Varghese, Chakalavadakeyil House,
Thombikandom P.O., Edamury, Ranny, PIN 689 676.
APPELLANT: 1"'RESPoNDENT V.2ND
1ST _. RESPONDENT
(Babu Abraham) (SajiAbraham) (Ansu)
Hnitu-l U*Ioss e-{
2ND APPELLANT 3RD RESPONDENT v/4TH RESPoNDENT
(Rachel Roy) (Abraham) (Suja Varghese)
PuJRt. ,9i
-----v alleslalion h onlywith regadh the
of lhe signalory and Embassy ol India
n0 rcsp0l|sibilily tor lhe conlonls,
D Sgu:t).a,&r..*;*
%^^tt-) tr-uDquoaant. t,2 a,al 4
2,
COMPROMISE PETITION FILED UNDER ORDER XXIII RULE 3
OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE.19O8
1. The above Regular Second Appeal arises from the judgment
and decree dated 18-06-2016 passed in A.S.No.12of 2016, on the files of
District Court, Pathanamthitta, which arises from the judgment and decree
dated 23-12-2015, passed in O.S.No.241 of 2012, on the files of Munsiffs
Court, Ranni.
2. Appellants and respondents 1 and 4 are the children of 3ro
respondent in the above appeal. The 2nd respondent is the wife of 1st
respondent. Appellants are the plaintiffs in O.S.No .241 of 2012, on the files
of Munsiffs Court, Ranni.
3. O.S.No.241 of 2012, on the files of Munsiffs Court, Ranni was
tried jointly with O.S.N o.205 of 2012 and O.S.No.243 of 2012, respectively.
The said suits were disposed by of the Munsiffs Court, Ranni as per the
common judgment dated 23-12-2015.
4. As per the said judgment dated 23-12-2015 the title of 1st
respondent herein over the plaint schedule property having an extent of
,....2ND
APPELLANT: RESPONDENT RESPONDENT
W
1ST 1ST
(Babu Abraham) (SajiAbraham) (Ansu)
Fni s ct P Uaflass-v1
2ND APPELLANT 3RD RESPONDENT \./.4TH RESPONDENT
(Rachel Roy) (Abraham) (Suja Varghese)
f*4/ &
Ilrh attestation h onryffiio rrre
identily 0f tlte signalory and Embassy
oltndia
bears no responsibililffor lha
conlenls,
T
t^-- {Y
J+e-o- P,+U\, f|Awa,jf
z JT-
B2-l'- t</e'q/2ooo
ve"aa4L-^t R,t, Qz% R+
-
76.77 Ares comprised in su rvey No.22614 of Ayroor Village based on Exhibit
,A1, Settlement deed No.157 of 2009 of Aranmula Sub Registry was
declared and Exhibit43, Cancelation deed No.1640 of 2011 and Exhibit44,
Sale deed No.306 of 2012 of Aranmula Sub Registrywere declared as null
and void.
5. Appellants and the 3'd respondent filed A.S.No.10 of 2016,
A.S No.11 of 2016 and A.S.No.12 of 2016 before the District Court,
Pathanamthitta challenging the above mentioned common judgment and
decrees passed in O.S.No.241 of 2012, O.S.No.205 of 2012 and
O.S.No.243 of 2012 of the Munsiff s court, Ranni. As per common judgment
and decree dated 18-06-2016, the District Court, Pathanamthitta, dismissed
the appeals, confirming and decree passed by the trial court.
6. Appellants and the 3rd respondent have filed R.S.A.No.97 of
2017, R.S.A.No.108 of 2017 and R.S.A.No.342 of 2017, challenging the
judgment and decrees passed by the District Court, Pathanamthitta in
A.S.Nos.10 of 2016. A.S No.1 1 of 2016 and A.S.No.1 2 of 2016.
.-/'1sr RESPONDENT /2ND
1STAPPELLANT: RESPoNDENT
(Babu Abraham) (Saji Abraham) (Ansu)
,zll+JtV' Hd'su P U offqro-J
,tSZ1
I
2ND APPELLANT 3RDTESPONDENT ,-/.41H RESPoNDENT
(Rachel Roy)
'
(Abraham) ...,:i.i.
'-'4g
(Suja
-Varghese)
$loi'!tr,''
,*, resadrorre
ruellilly 0t tfle $ignalory and Embassy
0ll]|dia
Dears tto responsibility lor the
c0fltettls,
!,*--g.,
J- s2r_
u
-8-n
h;
/ 355/oo
-
(Gur\Ael Qosp,'->-t-enl l r2., 4
+
7. lt is also submitted that the lstrespondent along with his
mother, late Aleyamma, filed W.P.(C).No .27874 of 2Q12 before this Hon'ble
Court, essentially challenging the order passed by the RDO and
Maintenance Tribunal, Thiruvalla, cancelling transfer of registry of decree
schedule property mutated in the name of lstrespondent, on the request of
3'o respondent. The said writ petition is still pending consideration before
this Hon'ble Court.
It is submitted that the appellants and the respondents have now
settled their disputes in the above appeal and connected appeals along with
W.P.(c).No.27874 of 2012, on the following terms'.
a. Appellants and respondents accept and acknowledge the title
and right of 1st respondent over the decree schedule property having an
extent of 76.77 Ares of land comprised in survey No.22614 of AyroorVillage,
based on Exhibit 41 Settlement deed No.157 of 2009 of Aranmula Sub
Registry.
1ST APPELLANT: v 1sr RESPONDENT /.zND RESPONDENT
(Babu Abraham) (Ansu)
0n isrl P Uo++qsft{
2ND APPELLANT 3RD RESPONDENT u,4TH RESPoNDENT
(Rachel Roy) (Abraham) (Suja Varghese)
4i13
this alhstafion is only with'ffgdtd to the
India
idenlity ol the signatory andtmbassy ol
bean no rssponsibility lot lho conlents.
I /\--
Jftr--A. p, AkE) to/oc,ma
J^ Gll , v /zss />o
-
C-o' ,tDel +r,^/ Q.Sp*Aoll l, e, 4
b. All parties accept and affirm the judgment and decree passed
by the Munsiffs Court, Ranni in O.S.No.205 of 2012 and O.S.No.243 of
2012, declaring Exhibit ,A3 Cancelation deed No.1640 of 2011 and Exhibit
44 Sale deed No.306 of 212 of Aranmula Sub Registry as null and Void.
c. Parties are hereby withdrawing all allegations raised against
each other in above said proceedings. The 3'd respondent has no grievance
against the 1st respondent and he does not wish to pursue any legal
proceedings against him.
d. The 1tt respondent has agreed to convey and transfer one-
half portion in the decree schedule property having an extent of 76.77 Ares
comprised in survey No.22614 of Ayroor Village based on Exhibit 41,
Settlement deed No.157112009 of Aranmula Sub Registry in favour of the
lstappellant by executing and registering a deed of conveyance, within a
period of 12 months from the date of the decree, at the cost of the 1't
appellant.
e. The appellants and 3'o respondent have no objection in
allowing W.P.C No.27874 of 2012 pending before this Hon'ble Court.
1ST APPELLANT: _. ISt RESPONDENT .. 2ND RESPONDENT
(Babu Abraham) (s^aj iAbraham) (Ansu)
I All r'ntw..,.
2ND
n D\
vt,-/-
APPELLANT
| s finisd
../4TH RESPONDENT
!"1+os+5
(Rachel Roy) (Abraham) (Suja Varghese)
,)s+io(
6W
ss il;ili tid;htahiY and Embasy ollndia
\eW nriit i'o tesponiibiliu lfflhe c0tttents'
J+z-o,?. *fsV |tvoc,nt
z- 5- 6-t, t</;,;s,/6"
f. All parties pray that R.S.A No. 97 of 2017, R.S.A No.108 of
2017 and R.S.A No.342 of 2017 before this Hon'ble Court may be disposed
of by passing decree in terms of this compromise.
Dated this the day of November,2020.
h
1ST APPELLANT:
(Babu Abraham)
,Ff'fffi1ap ll
6^ )\'* $ I
2ND APPELLANT Slgned ln mY Presence
(Slgnature Atteeted)
(Rachel Roy) Pce t/ Ko
CONSTJI"AR OtrIICER
EMBASSY OF INDIA
COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANTS: KTIWAIT
p4i05
's
,*ffi
1STRESPONDENT
(SajiAbraham) A "*1,*l,1lffil'illl;*
of India
EmbacsY
Kuwelt
'
(Ansu)
t,
P";tq-P- Uo$osset
\t zr-- t'-
^ ALF^xt-
couNSEL FoR THE RESeoNDENTS tazag Ihis alleslalion is only wilh rcgad lo lhe
l/ .-& l'-{; -loo q./l* idenlity olthe signaloryand Embassy ollndia
i{?"7.*,
-r\d--. >6b'-3\,^' beam no nsponsibiliU lor lhe c0nlents,
sfi,t!.'
\*-' L<'^aarry
i--qY:,Q^or 3RD RESpONDENI
i^o,.][;Ii''"-L,
c6+Dsel &d Jn^'- +({}-tYz/u
W\V.&
4TH RESPoNDEN
-
afotfl L. J' cflno4o't - / ^
(Suja Varghese)
K<"/M
/
4dr
