Kerala High Court

Byju P.R vs Shyni Vijayan on 22 July, 2021

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE
&

THE HONQURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH
THURSDAY, THE 22NP pay oF JULY 2021 / 31ST ASHADHA, 1943
MAT APPEAL NO. 300 OF 2013
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN OP 22/2011 OF FAMILY COURT,
KANNUR, KANNUR

APPELLANT / PETITIONER:
BYJU P.R, S/O. B. RAJENDRAN NAIR, RAJA BHAVAN,

PUNNAKULANGARA, P.O. KANOOL, TALIPARAMBA,
MORAZHA VILLAGE, KANNUR DISTRICT.

BY ADVS.
SRI .V.V.SURENDRAN
SRI.P.A.HARISH

RESPONDENT / RESPONDENT :

SHYNI VIJAYAN, AGED 29 YEARS, D/O. E.M. VIJAYAN,
SURABHI, P.O. PERUNTATTIL, ERANHOLI VILLAGE, VIA
ERANHOLI, THALASSERI, KANNUR - 670 107.

BY ADVS.
SRI.ARUN MATHEW VADAKKAN
SRI.K.P.SUDHEER

THIS MATRIMONIAL APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 22.07.2021, ALONG WITH Mat.Appeal .13/2017, 1166/2017,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 

Mat .Appeal Nos.300/2013, 13/2017, 1166/2017

eves

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE
&
THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH

gaurspay, tae 22NP pay oF JULY 2021 / 318T ASHADHA, 1943

MAT. APPEAL NO, 13 OF 2017

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN OP 163/2013 OF FAMILY

COURT, THALASSERY, KANNUR

APPELLANT /RESPONDENT :

BYJU P.R, AGED 39 YEARS, S/O. RAJENDRAN NAIR,
WORKING AS ELECTRICAL ENGINEER, MARIO
ASSOCIATES, DUBAI,

RESIDING AT RAJA BAHVAN, PUNNAKULANGARA,
P.O.KANOOL, MORAZHA VILLAGE , THALIPARAMBA TALUK,

REPRESENTED BY PA HOLDER RAJENDRAN NAIR, AGED 69
YEARS, S/O. BALAN PILLAI, RAJABHAVAN,
PNAKULANGARA, P.O.KANOOL,TALIPARAMBA, KANNUR.

BY ADVS.
SRI .V.V.SURENDRAN
SRI.P.A.HARISH

RESPONDENTS /PETITIONERS :

1

SHYNI VIJAYAN, AGED 34 YEARS, W/O. BYJU P.R,
RESIDING AT SURABHI, P.O.PERUMTHATTIL, ERNAHOLI
VILLAGE, THALASSERY TALUK,KANNUR DISTRICT - 670
101.

SREE LAKSHMI S.B, D/O. BYJU P.R, AGED 8 YEARS,
MINOR, REPRESENTED BY NEXT FRIEND, MOTHER SHYNI
VIJAYAN, RESIDING AT SURABHI, P.O.PERUMTHATTIL,
ERANHOLI VILLAGE, THALASSERY TALUK, KANNUR
DISTRICT ~ 670 101.

BY ADVS.
 

Mat..Appeal Nos.300/2013, 13/2017, 1166/2017
..3ee

SRI.ARUN MATHEW VADAKKAN
SRI .K.P.SUDHEER

THIS MATRIMONIAL APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 22.07.2021, ALONG WITH Mat.Appeal.300/2013 AND
CONNECTED CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE

FOLLOWING:
 

Mat .Appeal Nos.300/2013, 13/2017, 1166/2017

Ae.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT

THE HONQURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUBAMED MUSTAQUE

&

THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH

THURSDAY, THE 22NP pay oF JULY 2021 / 31ST ASHADHA, 1943

MAT APPEAL NO. 1166 OF 2017

AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN OP 178/2015 OF FAMILY

COURT, THALASSERY, KANNUR

APPELLANT /RESPONDENT :

BYJU P.R, AGED 39 YEARS, S/O. RAJENDRAN NAIR,
WORKING AS ELECTRICAL ENGINEER, MARIO
ASSOCIATES , DUBAI

RESIDING AT RAJA BHAVAN, PUNNAKULANGARA, P.O.
KANOOL, MORAZHA VILLAGE, THALIPARAMBA TALUK

REPRESENTED BY POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER
RAJENDRAN NAIR, AGED 69 YEARS, S/O. BALAN

PILLAI, RESIDING AT RAJA BHAVAN, PUNNAKULANGARA,
P.O KANOOL, MORAZHA VILLAGE, THALIPARAMBA TALUK.

BY ADVS.

SRI .V.V.SURENDRAN
SRI.P.A.HARISH

SMT .N.S.SOUMYA MOL

RESPONDENTS / PETITIONERS :

1

SHYNI VIJAYAN, AGED 34 YEARS, W/O. BYJU P.R.,
RESIDING AT SURABHI, P.O PERUMTHATTIL, ERANHOLI
VILLAGE, THALASSERY TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT-

670101.

SREELAKSHMI. $.B, AGED 8 YEARS, D/O. BUJU P.R,
REPRESENTED BY NEXT FRIEND AND MOTHER, SHYNI
VIJAYAN, W/O. BYJU P.R., RESIDING AT SURABHI,

P.O PERUMTHATTIL, ERANHOLI VILLAGE, THALASSERY
 

Mat .Appeal Nos.300/2013, 13/2017, 1166/2017

«Das

TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT~670101.

BY ARVS.

SRI.ARUN MATHEW VADAKKAN
SRI .K.P.SUDHEER

THIS MATRIMONIAL APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON

22.07.2021, ALONG WITH Mat.Appeal.300/2013 AND CONNECTED
CASES, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 

Mat .Appeal Nos.300/2013, 13/2017, 1166/2017

JUDGMENT

[Mat Appeal Noa.300/2013, 13/2017, 1166/2017]

A.Muhamed Mustaque, J

The parties were referred for mediation. The parties settled their dispute in the mediation. The mediation report is on Board. There are promises and reciprocal promises in the mediation agreement. The parties have approached the Family court, Thalassery for working out the terms and conditions in the mediation agreement. It 1s submitted that both parties requires six

months time to workout the mediation agreement.

2. Having considered the submissions at the Bar, we are of the view that these Mat. Appeals can be closed with liberty to reopen, in case the parties fails adhering to the terms and

conditions in the settlement.

The mediation agreement will form part of the

judgment. These Mat. Appeals are closed with the

Mat .Appeal Nos.300/2013, 13/2017, 1166/2017 cela

consent of the parties and liberty as above.

Sd/-

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE JUDGE

Sd/-

DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH JUDGE

DISTRICT MEDIATION CENTRE =X, DISTRICT CORT COMPLEX, THALASSERY

Ragga "ee . M.45/2021 PHONE: 0490 -2344666 | . Dated: 29.03.2021 ' To : The Registrar (Judicial) $e 2 .

: Hon'ble High Court of Kerala, : Ernakulam , : Sir, : Sub:- District Mediation Centre, Thalassery- Mediation of the matter in Mat. Appeal . No. 300/2013, Mat. Appeal No. 13/2017 and Mat. Appeal No. 1166/2017 of the ' Hon'ble High Court of Kerala- Report of Mediation -- Regarding | ® Refii} Order in Mat. Appeal No. 300/2013, Mat. Appeal No. 13/2017 and Mat. Appeal ' No. 1166/2017 dated: 27.1.2021 of the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala , i 2) Letter No Mat. Appeal No. 300/2013, 13/2017 and 1166/2017 Dated 28.01.2021 . } of the Registrar Judicial, Hon'ble High Court of Kerala. : As per the reference cited above, | may report that Mat. Appeal No. 300/2013, Mat: ; Appeai No. 13/2017 ana Mat. Appeal No. 1166/2017 on the file of Hon'ble High Court of

Kerala are settled in the mediation. The report of mediation submitted on 25.03.2021 by Mediator Adv. M. Romila, along with the Agreement of settlement executed by the

HAPMAP ena ctncedanpennererit:

parties are submitted herewith.

Respectfully submitted | Yours faithfully,

| :

. | @ OK

| on Co-ordinator

: ~ (District Judge)

| District Mediation Centre, Thalassery ~ .

Encl:- Report of Mediator dated 25.3.2021 and Agreement of settlement

* é

| Copy to:-

| The Director, Kerala State Mediation & Conciliation Centre Ram mohan Palace, Highcourt of Kerala, Kochi-31.

ES 6 ad Fe Hor-tO RA BK HIG CPT OF REFOSP

4. bp f LPL Aah. Appel Ae 200/, (3, S1E6f [& * a] "if

GG, AR Tote! #00 fll. febitiaan/ Apeba!

: is ' * * wn tha ides ft *} Shy Aa Wayne Uf Aah woo OT & DISTRICT MEDIATION CENTRE, THALASSERY

MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT UNDER SECTION 89 OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE r/w RULE 24 OF THE CIVIL PROCEDURE (ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION) RULES, 2008.

The parties above named beg to submit as follows:

1. The aforesaid Suit/Petition(s), Appeal(s), complaint were referred to mediation for resolving the dispute between the parties. In the course of mediation, they have resolved their dispute and have agreed to the following terms and conditions.

) 23 Aco)» anf) Ems Dp 6h 4,05) A tom poo) appr 29 4/ boy dy A)txds2) Card vaca ryan es ee/7 "Ym Y8)_J om 19 adeesstood fib lige Ido 9 By 74).

ii) | iis) iv}

2, In view of the aforesaid agreement entered in to between the parties

¢ iPS POLey ' : toe * >

the parties pray that the Suit(s}, Petition(s), Appeal(s) be decreed/ dismissed / disposed of in terms of the aforesaid agreement

& he CrONO® url

Ae cv bynk Vy Apu)

3. In view of the aforesaid agreement, the plaintiff(s)/Appellant(s) pray(s) me for refamd of the full Institution Fee.

4, Parties will appear on... before the Monourable Court for passing Orders/ Decree in terms of the above said agreement. 2 : Vago or a |. (> "VA . ee OTE NJ 4

2. Sree (0, bohww' ~ SD

Plaintifi(s), petitioner(s) a fp BA wut Defendant(s) 2G CS hyn' Vefoug 0

Appellant(s), Applicant(s) Respondent(s Complainant - a.

eee eo TG : mv en Advocate fof "V/ Advocate for nav' Plaintiff(s), /Petiti Defendant(s} Appellant(s), Applicant(s) . . Respondent(s) _ Complainant woe es Se Accuse VERIFICATION We, the parties above named, do hereby solemnly state and declare that what is contained in paragraphs 1 to are true to the best of our knowledge, information and belief, : < pees mS RCA eho dead ™ Place: J hala yserct Plaintiff(s) /Petitioner(s) /Appellant(s),

Complainant

iS az i

788 1 Sen Vagnyn SAO € 2B

conn ee ec eee en sn eee eee eee eee ene ee

" JOWJO

GAO}: GOB AOL AMISM ECHISO DMNIIOAd

Mat. Appeal No.300/2013

Mat, Appeal No. 13/2017

Mat. Appeal No. 1166/2018

OOTUL} HOG JOIG

Vs.

Aaa afer agyord das

GOO3 GAIWVIOL) MBHHo HAY DIAWIGWOS AYTUIOD [email protected] Moy

ALUMNA BLOMMWea] GATO}JA -----«COIOD} wosdlmodjaom MeaafewManyo MI DoMafNdaajm).

1. [email protected] aN Ol [email protected] Manlenss aflaioan sniMwo smo Myséan} Galoe,00 MOALSAGY aQMs 0} ecriildvIaOXo genoabyaomMaiady GBSAITLUNIM GONG Meafleomayo GaldMs aeons ailaldaN GAIaIM aneel Sec. 13(B) ming}: MeIGQe é&jSjoenI HIST] DMO aNWEejodazuowe

so aflesMayo MIO} DOM aflo1.4H}M}.

2. gaws aneriniloe: apnoléa-ail BOO\H6) LDDUIO Raman! 20

BGM al aNoesenod NBAIODM AAGOHY}AWJo (ATED Mon1yores

5 eidsto @al aflaiono GAdaIM AdOMDIG BafilsyaM BlaiTmvo OO9dH0 aftemanoal

MBGAMBMJo 6NIH91 15 LlAMo AIDS D.D. aflaionno GaooIm anasilaiad [email protected]! [email protected] MNe®da}mM slaimo A0O81A0000 = MNGAJAMGIMIo

MIQDINBIOAGI HM). NMBA RDo aVNT1GAAMIMOsDJo PoHAMoo DABANBS BO - UGGHAOM ~ Boo Hoel afleinje~ dad 25 etasio jal DArBOS GasPlGd MO oI, MOLISQS (MEM! GoAawow aoaumlalemas [email protected] aleflve aflaOjEonsad GMOMIMDO] GOAMICHAJSJOO sHAr26TIS}0 MIEHAinlo MSGMLAMAIMJo MONMGs asain OaiqQyany. Mera avec" _ Paar [email protected] aflainl avosl} anommMo 088] (nIDIONBS TM BM Blairvo 1H aNOENAH9008 MEIANG MGS}JIM CIGOIG osoeled DAVINS GaAITA O05, HNTM GOON,

OD a OSAMA hidasins Ura ov eh. BSS & Gok nt

eee ee eee EEE

en,

3, DY CHAMVIOL aHOliHaslwmow aoa alewad [email protected] eyowload,os BMo Qn aAKladasod @hIsGi] DMA [email protected]@Jo DOO}o aVNMBHasionoom aniwlaflafigyas C.C. 327/2018 muni caad mo acm Midafiag sgslrunomanied My oHoldsasl aiBoielaammoosmm)>

MIAUDTaflelaayM), covelaosed aflaideo Ma wWaD GREMlalay mello

ROAIMO AMladoAD GHIAIM aoselaled ameloaisyenyam dlairvo aos daa

ADOMIANIOS BHidloe OGMJAMMIoanmMJo MOIMIG Toanaafialanjmn}.

4. ANOBMAHIRAGY}O [email protected] CasPMlenss AnLQALOGs snows @[email protected] wnoemflenss seodal sioe ceneadlad mocences aflaioo GHIA adeelUId aaflsyaM Plainvo aneeilaqoed [email protected] AHIWSOOW BAY

aQNOlemaal roamMlafelanym).

5. aQTlémaa coniodlaflay alla Msqpeacd adOe] aD) [email protected] ANSBNANIEHA MOH GRLOHVMEIOL) AVIS RalOIMIGHN MSasslOIGs eaion Miedl [email protected] aNdeedl ag Oldmaa - EMIWla fledsnonseMoacnxMYZo MMines Gauswlaflajy OddwrsjZo. Me Alleomano Maxled mmlwcsmo§ OMe W0AMIG MIIW\MO)o MAIMIMBAAMMagM}o *Werinows

BAMWSOAF DD Coed] aneeieaies MM MA>AMABJo Baflgholsazan}.

agms 2021 aoeaj aoaqvo 15 M'iga)

7) ~ 60 OL.

aooelsnoedd ancnejafim, cane) oi aN] BOM GRADIO a oh DAMS MDAHOM GOs DIGR(BE MBA , ; . vance B karcedaan Va"? » \ en AEF Oa .

aNoldaaa : ooauigy) aileawdd --FVOTEAaAwM Gone GRAviaeaod

GAOLIVOID MoNGlAOBg}oo MOJOANY MIAUMJOag {SOO east

OIQSOIG gM coed nOOe1OC Bqfiglolaajam)},

aNOMlan0ends aasrejaim case] f 2 Noy

Bee

Before. Ihe on' bf. Ohh Corus t } kercitoar |

aMcrke ey fan * Mr) : AS / &.

Meek . Appeal Boo |13