Yuvaraj vs Ramachandran
2021 Latest Caselaw 13470 Ker

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                         PRESENT
         THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.ANIL KUMAR
  MONDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF JUNE 2021 / 7TH ASHADHA, 1943
                   RSA NO. 766 OF 2018
    AS 113/2015 OF I ADDITIONAL SUB COURT, ERNAKULAM
 OS NO.557/2013 OF I ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF COURT, ERNAKULAM


APPELLANT/S:

    1    YUVARAJ, AGED 55 YEARS, S/O. SIVASANKARAN,
         SAROJA SANKARA NILAYAM,MANJELIPADAM, EROOR WEST,
         NADAMA VILLAGE,KANAYANNUR TALUK,ERNAKULAM
         DISTRICT, PIN - 682 306.

    2    RANI @ POONKUYILI, W/O. YUVARAJ, AGED 47 YEARS,
         SAROJA SANKARA NILAYAM,MANJELIPADAM, EROOR WEST,
         NADAMA VILLAGE, KANAYANNUR TALUK,ERNAKULAM
         DISTRICT, PIN - 682 306.

         BY ADVS.
         SRI.PHILIP T.VARGHESE
         SMT.ACHU SUBHA ABRAHAM
         SRI.THOMAS T.VARGHESE



RESPONDENT/S:

         RAMACHANDRAN, AGED 59 YEARS, S/O. VENKITAPATHY,
         BALAJI, T M C 29/302, MANJELIPADAM EROOR WEST,
         NADAMA VILLAGE, KANAYANNUR TALUK,ERNAKULAM
         DISTRICT - 682 306.

         BY ADVS.
         T.B. THANKAPPAN
         T.T. HARIKUMAR
         ASHISH VIDYADHARAN


THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 28.06.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
 RSA 766/2018

                                  ..2..

                               JUDGMENT

This appeal is directed against the judgment and

decree of the First Additional Sub Court,

Ernakulam in AS No. 113 of 2015 dated 04.04.2018,

confirming the judgment and decree of the First

Additional Munsiff Court, Ernakulam in OS No. 557

of 2013 dated 10.04.2015. The suit was filed for

both prohibitory and mandatory injunctions.

2. When this appeal came up for consideration, the

learned counsel for the appellants filed a memo

stating that the appellants do not intend to

proceed with the appeal as they have removed the

gate erected on the western boundary of their

property opening to plaint B schedule property as

directed by the two courts below.

Recording the memo, this RSA stands dismissed as

withdrawn. There would be no order as to costs.

Sd/-

N.ANIL KUMAR

JUDGE Bka/28.06.2021