Kerala High Court
Najkabi Shihabudheen vs Puthan Peediakakkal Muhammedali ... on 15 March, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MARY JOSEPH
MONDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 24TH PHALGUNA, 1942
RFA.No.511 OF 2016(B)
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE IN OS No.437/2007 DATED 13-08-2015
OF
III ADDITIONAL SUB COURT, KOZHIKODE
APPELLANTS 1 TO 3:
1 NAJKABI SHIHABUDHEEN,
AGED 48 YEARS, W/O.MUHAMMED SHIHABUDHEEN,
BAVA MANZIL, FEROKE AMSOM, NALLUR DESOM,
KOZHIKODE TALUK.
2 ALTHAF SHIHABUDHEEN,
AGED 30 YEARS,
S/O.MUHAMMED SHIHABUDHEEN,
BAVA MANZIL, FEROKE AMSOM,
NALLUR DESOM,KOZHIKODE TALUK.
3 FIROZ SHIHABUDHEEN,
AGED 28 YEARS,
S/O.MUHAMMED SHIHABUDHEEN,
BAVA MANZIL, FEROKE AMSOM,
NALLUR DESOM, KOZHIKODE TALUK.
BY ADVS.
SRI.K.M.FIROZ
SRI.S.KANNAN
SMT.M.SHAJNA
RESPONDENT/PLAINTIFF AND 4TH DEFENDANT:
1 PUTHAN PEEDIAKAKKAL MUHAMMEDALI HAJI,
S/O.PUTHEN PEEDIKAKKAL IBRAHIM,
AGED 58 YEARS,CHERUKAVU AMSOM, DESOM,
CHERUKAVU VILLAGE,ERNAD TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT,
NOW RESIDING AND HAVING BUSINESS AT JIDDAH, SAUDI
ARABIA,REPRESENTED BY POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER
A.ABDUL RASHEED, S/O.MUHAMMED,
AGED 49 YEARS,NELLIKKATHODY HOUSE,
MATHUVALLUR VILLAGE,ERNAD TALUK,
MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, 676503.
RFA.No.511/2016(B) 2
2 MUHAMMED SHIHABUDHEEN,
AGED 52 YEARS, S/O.NALAKATH BAVA HAJI,BAVA MANZIL,
FEROKE AMSOM, NALLUR DESOM,KOZHIKODE TALUK.,
673303.
R1 BY ADV. SRI.P.B.KRISHNAN
SRI.P.M.NEELAKANDAN
SRI.S.NITHIN ANCHAL
SRI.SABU GEORGE
SRI.P.B.SUBRAMANYAN
R2 BY ADV. SRI.E.C.AHAMED FAZIL
THIS REGULAR FIRST APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
15.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
RFA.No.511/2016(B) 3
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 15th day of March, 2021
The parties to the appeal settled the issues involved in O.S
No.437 of 2007 out of court and the terms of settlement have been
entered into an agreement executed by them. I.A No.01/2021 is
filed under Order XXIII Rule 3 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
to accept the agreement and to pass appropriate orders in the
Appeal. The original agreement is produced alongwith the
application as Annexure-A. I.A No.02/2021 is filed seeking to
accept Annexure-A. All parties to the appeal affixed their
signatures in Annexure-A. It is submitted by the counsel holding
vakalath for the appellants that though a registered notice was sent,
it was returned unserved and therefore he has no information
about settlement of issues. All parties to the appeal are present.
Their address found in the appeal memorandum was verified with
the Aadhar Card and Voters I.D Card. Though some differences
were noticed in the address found in the Aadhar card and address
shown in the appeal memorandum, the address in the appeal
memorandum and Voters ID Card are same.
2. In that result, I.A No.1/2021 and I.A No.02/2021 are
allowed. R.F.A stands disposed of in terms of Annexure-A
agreement, which shall also form part of this judgment.
Since the appeal was filed as indigent, appellants are bound
to pay half of the court fee. If not paid within three weeks from the
date of this order, steps shall be initiated for realising the same
from the appellants.
Sd/-
MARY JOSEPH
JUDGE
JJ
