A.J.Shaji vs Sebastian
2022 Latest Caselaw 10472 Ker

                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                      PRESENT
                   THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.R.ANITHA
            FRIDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2022 / 15TH ASWINA, 1944
                               RSA NO. 108 OF 2015
    AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE IN AS 49/2006 OF SUB COURT, CHERTHALA
PREFERRED AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE IN OS 759/2004 OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF
                               COURT, CHERTHALA
APPELLANTS/RESPONDENTS 1 AND 2/DEFENDANTS 1 AND 2:

     1      A.J.SHAJI, AGED 48 YEARS
            S/O.JOSEPH, AREASSERIL HOUSE, ARTHINKAL P.O.,
            CHERTHALA SOUTH PANCHAYATH, CHERTHALA SOUTH VILLAGE,
            ALAPPUZHA-688530.
     2      MINI SHAJI, AGED 38 YEARS
            W/O.A.J.SHAJI, AREASSERIL HOUSE,
            ARTHINKAL P.O., CHERTHALA SOUTH PANCHAYATH,
            CHERTHALA SOUTH VILLAGE, ALAPPUZHA-688530.

            BY ADVS.
            SRI.K.C.ELDHO
            SRI.ANEESH JAMES
            SRI.JIJO THOMAS


RESPONDENT/APPELLANT/PLAINTIFF:

            SEBASTIAN, AGED 50 YEARS
            S/O.LAWRENCE, CHAMBAKKADU HOUSE, CHERTHALA SOUTH MURI,
            CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT-688524.

            BY ADV SRI.J.OM PRAKASH


     THIS REGULAR SECOND APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07.10.2022,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 R.S.A NO.108 OF 2015
                                        2




                                 JUDGMENT

Dated this the 7th day of October, 2022.

This appeal has been filed against judgment and decree in

A.S.No.49/2006 on the file of the Sub Court, Cherthala

preferred against the judgment and decree in O.S.No.759/2004

on the file of Munsiff's Court, Cherthala.

2. When the matter came up for hearing on 26.09.2022,

following order has been passed;

"The learned counsel for the appellant submit that the appeal would not be pressed and only thing is that he should get Exts. A8, A9 and A14 produced before the Trail court which are the documents showing the liability from the properties have been cleared by payment of amount to the Bank and other concerns.

2. The learned counsel for the respondent would contend that those documents pertains to other shares in the partition deed, and hence, it cannot be handed over to the appellant. In that event, the learned counsel for the appellant would submit R.S.A NO.108 OF 2015

that he would apply for certified copies of the above documents and if all the original is required, it will be shown by the respondent as and when required.

The learned counsel for the appellant would also submit that he would file a memo to that effect. The learned counsel for the respondent has no objection in recording the memo.

Post on 30.09.2022."

3. Today when the matter is taken up, the learned counsel

for the appellants filed memo in which it has been stated that

Exts. A8, A9 and A14 are registered documents and Exts. A12

and A13 are unregistered certificates.

4. The learned counsel for the appellants submits that

they already received certified copies of Exts. A8, A9 and A14.

It is stated in the memo filed by the the learned counsel for the

appellants that originals of Exts. A12 and A13 will be returned

to the appellants after payment of amount by the appellants.

There will be a direction to respondent to produce originals of

Exts. A8, A9 and A14 if necessary on demand by authorities.

By recording the above facts, the appeal is disposed of. R.S.A NO.108 OF 2015

Appellant shall pay the entire decree amount as ordered by the

1st appellate court within thirty days from the date of receipt

of copy of this judgment. Upon such payment Exts.A12 and

A13 shall be returned to the appellant by the Trial court.

Sd/-

M.R.ANITHA, JUDGE

rps/