V.O. Chummar vs V.O Joseph @ Kuttappan
2022 Latest Caselaw 3280 Ker

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                  PRESENT
                 THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.SOMARAJAN
     FRIDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF MARCH 2022 / 27TH PHALGUNA, 1943
                           RFA NO. 392 OF 2017
  AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED 21.12.2016 IN I.A.(FDA)
            NO.296/2012 IN OS 8/1998 OF SUB COURT,KATTAPPANA
APPELLANTS/COUNTER PETITIONERS 1 TO 3/PLAINTIFFS:

    1        V.O. CHUMMAR, S/O.JOSEPH, AGED 72 YEARS, VALAYATHIL
             HOUSE, ARUNAPURAM KARA,PULIYANNOOR VILLAGE, PALA,
             MEENACHIL TALUK,KOTTAYAM DISTRICT 686 575
    2        BENNY JOHN @ BINOY JOHN
             S/O.ULAHANNAN, AGED 46 YEARS,VALAYATHIL HOUSE,
             ARUNAPURAM KARA, PULIYANNOOR VILLAGE,PALA, MEENACHIL
             TALUK,    KOTTAYAM DISTRICT 686 575
    3        BIJOY JOSE JOHN,
             S/O. ULAHANNAN, AGED 43 YEARS,VALAYATHIL HOUSE,
             ARUNAPURAM KARA, PULIYANNOOR VILLAGE,PALA, MEENACHIL
             TALUK, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT 686 575

             (APPELLANTS 2 AND 3 ARE REPRESENTED IN THIS PROCEEDINGS
             BY THEIR POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER 1ST APPELLANT)

             BY ADVS.
             SRI.K.S.HARIHARAPUTHRAN
             SRI.DIPU JAMES
             SRI.GEORGE MATHEW
             SRI.M.D.SASIKUMARAN
             SRI.SUNIL KUMAR A.G
RESPONDENT/PETITIONER/DEFENDANTS 3 & 4:

    1        V.O JOSEPH @ KUTTAPPAN
             AGED 66 YEARS, S/O.LATE JOSEPH,VALAYATHIL HOUSE,
             ATTAPPALAM KARA,KUMALI VILLAGE, PEERMEDU TALUK,
             IDUKKI DISTRICT 685 509
    2        ACHAMMA JOSEPH
             W/O. C.V JOSEPH,AGED 65 YEARS, CHITTADIYIL,
             CHENNAPADI P.O,KANJIRAPALLI TALUK,
             KOTTAYAM DISTRICT 686 520
             BY ADVS.
             SMT.ASHA P.KURIAKOSE
             SRI.P.C.CHACKO (PARATHANAM)
     THIS    REGULAR   FIRST   APPEAL   HAVING   COME   UP   FOR   HEARING   ON
18.03.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 RFA NO. 392 OF 2017             2

                            JUDGMENT

The learned counsel for the appellants fairly

submitted that he is not pressing the appeal. A memo

to that effect is also submitted. Hence, the appeal

is dismissed as not pressed.

Sd/-

P.SOMARAJAN JUDGE msp