Kerala High Court
Narayanankutty vs Anu on 24 February, 2023
IN THE HIGH couRT OF KERAILA AT EENAKulnM
PRESENT
THE HONOuEIABIE rmR. 4usTlcE ANIL K. NARENDRAN
&
THE HONOuRABLE MR.dusTlcE p.G. ArlTHKun>4aR
FRIDAY, THE 24TH DAY oF FEBRunR¥ 2o23 / 5TH PHALGUNA, 1944
RAT.APPEAI. NO.392 0F 2015
AGAINST THE JUDCRENT DATED 09.10.2014 IN 0.P.NO.1253 0F 2012 0N THE
FILE OF THE FAMILY COURT, THRISSUR
APPELENT :
ANu, AGED 28 yEARs, D/O. PAMBOOR KAIARIKKAI., rm7KtINDAN,
PURANATTUKARA DESOM P.0. /VILIAGE , THRISSUR TALUK, PIN-680
551
BY jDVS .
K. R. ARI]N ICRls[ntAN
DEEPA K. RADIIAECRISHNAN
RE S PONDENT S :
NARAYANANKUTTY, AGEI) 63 YEARS,
THANNISSERY , KAIARIKKAL SETHU PANICRER, ENNAPPADAM DE8OM,
pAnATHERy AMsoM, EIAppul,Ly p.O. , EIAppulLy 11 vlLIACE,
PAIAKKAD TAI+UK a DISTRICT 678 622
REMnDEvl, AGED 55 ¥EARs,
W/0 THANNISSERY KAILARIKKAL SETHU PANICKER, ENNAPPADAM
DESOM, PALIATHERY AMSOM, ELAPPULLY P.O. , EIAPPUIILY 11
VILIACE, PAIAFCKAD TALUK & DISTRICT -678 622
NISHA, AGED 35 YEARS,
W/O. IIARIDAS, D/0. THANNISSERY KAIARIKKAI. SETHU PANICRER,
ENNAPPADAM DESOM, PALIATHERY AMSOM, EIAPPULLY P.O. ,
EI.APPUILY 11 VILI-AGE, PAI.ARECAD TALUK a DISTRICT -678 622
BY ADV SRI.VINOD KUMAR.C
THIS MATRIMONIAI. APPEAI- HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24 . 02 . 2023 ,
AI.ONG wlTH RAT.AppEAL. 65/2022, THE cOuRT ON Tlm SAME DAy DELlvERED TIE
FOLLCWING :
Mat. Appeal Nos.392 of 2015 & 65 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF RERAIA AT EENAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONouRABLE MR. TusTlcE ANIL K. NARENDRaei
&
THE HONOuRABLE in. -USTICE p. G. ATITHKUMaR
FRIDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF FEBRTARY 2023 / 5TH PHALGURA, 1944
RAT.APPEAI. NO. 65 0F 2022
IN O.P.NO.1253 0F 2012 0N THE FILE OF THE FAMILY COURT, THRISSUR
APPELENI :
NARAYANANKtJTTY ,
AGED 7o ¥Ems,
THANNISSERY KAIARIKKAL, ENNAIADAM DESOM, PALIATHERY AMSOM,
EIAppuLLy pOsT, EILAppuLLy 11 vll.I.AGE , pAlnlcKAI] TALUK,
PAIAICKAD DISTRICT
PAILAKKAD, PIN - 678622
BY ADV VINOD KUMAR.C
RE S PONDENT S :
AV,
AGED 33 YEjRS,
RESIDING AT IAKS"I ICRIPA, PUEENATTUKARA VILIAGE , THRISSUR
Pal+UK, THRISSUR DISTRICT.
THRISSUR, PIN - 680551
Eu-EVI ,
AGED 6o ¥Ems,
THANNlssERy KAIARIKKAL, ENNAPADAM DEsOM, pA114ATHERy AMsaM,
EIAPPUILY POST, EIAPpuliLY 11 VILLAGE, PAILAKKAD IAI.UK,
PAIAKKAD DISTRICT
PAIAKKAD, PIN - 678622
NIsm,
AGED 40 YEARS,
THANNISSERY KAIARIKKAI., ENNAPADAM DESOM, PALIATHERY AMSOM,
EIAPPUI.LY POST, EIAPpuliLY 11 VII.IAGE , PAIAKKAD TAI.UK,
PAIAKKAD DISTRICT
PAIAKKAI), PIN - 678622
THIS RATRIMONIAL APPEAI. HAVING CchE UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24 . 02 . 2023 ,
ALONG WITH RAT.APPEAL.392/2015, THE COURT ON TIE SAME DAY I)ELIVERED TIH
FOLLonNG :
Mat. Appeal Nos.392 of 2015 & 65 of 2022
JUDGMENT
Anil K. Narendran, J.
Since parties are one and the same, these matters are
heard together and are being disposed of by this common
judgment.
2. Mat. ADDeal No.392 of 2015:- The appellant filed
O.P.No.1253 of 2012 on the file of the Family Court, Thrissur
against the respondents for return of 501/2 soverings of the gold
ornaments or its value of Rs.11,31,200/-, a sum of Rs.1,75,000/-
and for return of the articles mentioned in the 8 schedule or its
value of Rs.45,000 from the respondents and their assets. The
said original petition was decreed against the lst respondent
herein. The operative portion of that I.udgment reads thus;
"20, Point No.6: Considering the nature of the case, I direct
both parties to suffer their respective costs.
In the result, the petition is allowed as follows:
(1) The lst respondent is directed to return A schedule
gold ornaments to the petitioner within a period of a
month from today. If he fails to return the gold
ornaments he shall pay its value at the rate of
Rs.20,000/- per sovereign with 6% interest from the
date of the order till realisation.
2) The lst respondent is directed to return 8 schedule
household articles except the computer mentioned
therein within a period of one month from today. If he
fails to return them the petitioner is entitled to get
Mat. Appeal Nos.392 of 2015 & 65 of 2022
Rs.20,000/-with 6% interest from the date of the order."
3. Feeling aggrieved by the].udgment and decree of the
Family Court in O.P.No.1253 of 2012 to the extent of exonerating
respondents 2 and 3, the appellant has filed this appeal before
this Court, invoking the provisions under Section 19(1) of the
Family Courts Act, 1984. The appeal was filed along with C.M.
Application No.1411 of 2015 for condoning the delay of 5 days,
which was condoned by the order dated 03,10.2018.
4. On 12.10.2018, when this appeal came up for
consideration, this Court admitted the matter on file.
Respondents entered appearance through counsel,
5. Mat. ADDeal No. 65of2022: Thisappeal is filed bythe
lst respondent in Mat. Appeal No.392 of 2015 against the
judgment and decree in O.P.No.1235 of 2012. This appeal is one
filed along with C.M.Application No.1 of 2022 for condonation of
delay of 1979 days.
6. On 14.02.2022, whenthis appeal came upforfurther
consideration, this Court issued consolidated notice to the
respondents, by speed post, in both C.M. Application and appeal.
7. On 18.11.2022, when these appeals came up for
consideration, the learned counsel on both sides submitted that
the matters can be referred for mediation. By the order dated
Mat. Appeal Nos.392 of 2015 & 65 of 2022
18.11.2022, both appeals were referred for mediation before the
District Mediation Centre, Palakkad, on 03.12.2022 at 11.00 a.in.
8. Now, the parties have settled the disputes in
mediation and they have entered into a memorandum of
agreement dated 28.12.2022, which is placed on record along
with the report dated 29.12.2022 of the District Coordinator,
District Mediation Centre, Palakkad.
9. Today, when these matters are taken up for
consideration, the learned counsel on both sides would submit
that since the parties have settled the disputes in mediation,
these appeals can be disposed of in terms of the terms and
conditions contained in the memorandum of settlement dated
28.12.2022.
In such circumstances, these appeals are disposed in terms
of the terms and conditions contained in the memorandum of
settlement dated 28.12.2022, which shall form part of this
judgment.
Sd/-
ANIL K. NARENDRAN, JUDGE
Sd/-
P.G. AJITHKUMAR, JUDGE
MIN
// 8crf EL Hul% 1& N®'. 3I+3ol|23
n] f ft
•-.:: 3,-No Tq5/Ic)21
District Mediation Centre,Palakkad.
Med.No.931/2022.
Dated.29.12.2022.
From
Sri.Jayawanth.L
District Co-ordinator
(Additional District Judge)
District Mediation Centre,
Palakkad.
To
The Registrar (Judicial)
High Court of Kerala
Kochi.682031
Sir'
Sub:-MediationinMat.AppealNo.392/2015andMat.AppealNo.65/2022ofthe
Hon'ble High Court at the District Mediation Centre, Palakkad report
submitting of-reg.
Ref:-Order dated 18.11.2022 in of Mat.Appeal No.392/2015 and Mat.Appeal
No.65/2022 the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala.
*********
As per the reference cited above the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala referred
Mat.Appeal No.392/2015 and Mat.Appeal No.65/2022LE±:PistriQ|Mediation Centr_e,
Palakkad for mediation, directing the parties to mark their appearance before the District
Mediation Centre, Palakkad.
On appearance of both parties before the District Mediation Centre, Palak'kad.
Advocate Smt.Beena.P.V was appointed as the mediator in the above case. On
conducting mediation sitting on 22.12.2022 and 28.12.2022 mediator has filed report to
the effect that the matter is settled in mediation. The mediation report is enclosed
a herewith for kind information and necessary action.
Yours faithfully
dr
District Co-ordinator
(Additional District Judge)
Encl:-Mediation report A
/,
:..-:.:.rii-_:'`.:,::';
=hE
BEFORE THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM
Mat Appeal 392/2015
& Mat Appeal No.65/2022
Med No.931/2022
Mat Appeal 392/2015
Anu Appellant
Vs
Narayanakutty & 2 others Respondents
Mat Appeal 65/2022
Narayanankutty Appellant
Vs
Anu & 2 others Respondents
PALAKKAD MEDIATION CENTRE
MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT U/S 89 0F THE CODE OF CIVIL
PROCEDURE R/W RULE 24 0F THE CIVIL PROCEDURE (ALTERNATIVE
DISPUTE RESOLUTION) RULES 2008
The parties above named beg to submit as follows: -
The aforesaid cases were referred to mediation for resolving the dispute
3:gr:enthteheA3aftif:n::3n%`#itE:ia%knand:cteidn?h§.4£°u/2s°eT5offmFeDJfat,%:Td::8
appellants and respondents appeared before the mediator and have resolved
their dispute as mentioned below.
1. The |st and 3rd respondents in Mat Appeal No.392/2015 of the Hon'ble High
Ar`naal No.65/2022
Appeal N^ f=C/.n®.
Counselforrespondents*5;%#ha%y¥#itrRe#ntTf~
:i.:ini.:ii: Mat Appeal 392/2015 and appellant in
Mat Appeal No.65/2022
whk`i[ap#"i`:3`farrers-p-one:}is£:tftypeal
392/2015 and 3rd respondaht in Mat
Appeal No.65/2022
Appeal No.392/2015 (1st respondent in Mat Apeal No.65/2022) have agreed to
execute a settlement deed in favour of the daughter of the appellant in Mat
Appeal No.392/2015 named Goury T.D of their respective rights regarding the
property shown as the schedule attached along with this agreement which is
::3:,Ta:tsj£'#::acphpeedaT'Ropr3°9P£Z%fj!£a:jn4s°t°t/h2e°t2:a(rseu:tp:°nrd:#j#:nm:I::vP}d:::
on 1.6.2022)).
2. The appellant in Mat Appeal No.392/2015 is agreed to lift the attachment over
the property mentioned hereunder as per I.A.2491/2012 in O.P.1253/2012 of
Family Court, Thrissur
3. The appellant in Mat Appeal No.392/2015 is agreed to vacate the injunction
:;deer:tij:e°B:h|:5T3h/:::r:I:::#8tat#:s'?nc{::,No?i:°na°ieE:afptR:"¥stsr::+gnd::;
and the deceased husband of the appellant in Mat Appeal No.392/2015. It is
further agreed to handover the gold ornaments kept in the above mentioned
locker to the daughter of the appellant named Gouri in the presence of the
parties.
4. Both the parties agreed to arlow the lst respondent (Narayanankufty) father of
the deceased husband of the appellant in Mat Appeal 392/2015 to reside in the
ground floor of the house for life in the property to be assigned as per this
agreement. And it is further agreed that the appellant in Mat Appeal 392/2015
will not make any obstructions to the lst respondent's peaceful life in the house.
5. Both the parties agreed to letting out the first floor of the property as per the
liberty of the appellant in Mat Appeal 392/2015 and agreed to deposit the rent
amount in the joint account of the appellant in Mat Appeal 392/2015 and her
daughter Gouri.
6. Appellant in Mat Appeal 392/2015 (plaintiff in O.S.400/2015 and FDIA pending
before the Addl.Munsjff Court, Palakkad) is agreed to withdraw the said suit after
the assignment of the property agreed above.
7. In case of default committed by any party, the other party can proceed with the
Mat Appeals.
Au`k.in dr
[email protected]¢9g#€ige:'nadnt)!nR::;£npdpeenat`inMat
Appeal No.65/2022
P`l cs] 's I 'c' q 3
S
Counsel for respondents prffnid;#esp+#
Mat Appeal 392/2015 and appellant in
Mat Appeal No.65/2022
ffiJ'"4 ^N#d^ \1
nt in Mat Appeal
392/2015 and 3rd respondaht in Mat
Appeal No.65/2022
8. On the above terms and conditions the above Mat Appeals may be disposed
of according to law.
9. The. parties have put their signature voluntarily.
Dated this the 28th day of Dece ber 2022
Ayut.K.w\
Counsel for appellant fl
i cayfE:,{APEeJ'na]nt+)a Mat Appeal
6±%%2a°,1#:8/i;L2EespondentinMat
A'.,
ck|ai6/r3;3 S.
MaxpouoKJftyrfuL
Counsel for respondents J 1. Narayanvankufty lsd Respon6==Il=
Mat Appeal 392/2015 and appellant in
W Mat Appeal No.65/2022
in Mat Appeal
392/2015 and 3rd respond6ht in Mat
Appeal No.65/2022
We the parties above named 1) Anu, aged 35 years, D/o Pamboor
Kalarikkal Mukundan, Puranattukara desom, Thrissur Taluk (appellant/petitioner
in Mat Appeal 392/15 and let respondent in 65/2022) and 2) Narayanankufty,
aged 71 years, S/o Thannissery Kalarikkal Sethu Panicker, Ennappadam desom
PaLLathery amsom, Elappully Post, Palakkad, (1st respondent in Mat Appeal
392/15 and appellant in Mat Appeal 65/2022), 3) Nisha, aged 42 years, W/o
Haridas, Ennappadam desom, Pallathery amsom, Elappully Post, Palakkad, (3rd
respondent in Mat Appeal Nos 392/2015 and 65/2022) do hereby solemnly state
that what is contained in para 1 to 9 are true to the best of our knowledge and
be,,efands,gnedthls°ntheab°Vedate&££T?gke:Tadntt)ifepeenat],nMat
SAI:p^ela=Jb rfe
1. Narayanankufty lsd Respondent in
Mat Appeal 392/2015 and appellant in
Mat Appeal No.65/2022
e nt in Mat Appeal
392/2ol 5 and 3rd respondeht in Mat
Appeal No.65/2022
I V\
Schedule of property in O.S.400/2015 Addl.Munsiff Court, Palakkad
Disthct Palakkad
sub district Palakkad
Taluk Palahad
Village Elappuny 2
Amsom desom Pallatherv/Ennappadam
F`irka Elappully
Panchayath Elapully
Extent 0.0392 Hec
Richt/classification Jenm/pura_vidan
Description of property: House and compound with all other
Improvements as per the settlement deed No.6728/2011 of SRO
Palakkad dated 7.9.2011
Boundaries:
E: Panchayath Road
S: Property of Nisha
W: Excess land
N: Panchayath ro_ad
Dated this the 28th day of December 2022
counse,forappe„antf;Lctftygrfg#£#e:,nadife:;£npdpeenat,,nMat
#Tj#::#2i2:£try~nlL
Counsel for respondents rfrofui 1. Narayanankutty lst Respondent in
Mat Appeal 392/2015 and appellent in
`V.5 Mat Appeal No.65/2022
h lil
"a"2``:#dares!o`##tAppeal
it''|B,
392/2015 and 3rd respondent in Mat
Appeal No.65/2022
C'
I
KERALA STATE MEDIATION AND CONCII.IATION CENTRE
--f:I-=!.I.rq,,nF5.`€r`oURT .VIEDIATloN CENTRE / DISTRICT IVIEDIATloN CENTRE
l|,.'.i`!Le
:zS~rirr.:
o BE RETURNED 'ro THE NODAL OFFICER
i....1'"
., I
ro BE coplED To THE REFERING juDGE
TigJ....A#'
u6f|oha±%qu|a
L)id the cLise ul[l["l[ely `eltle: Mce{.hao. iG`\LL .Vo
i. lf yes:
„ Dale ohettlemen[: 2Je.I.!ZJ2ca.2L ......
b) Has the igreemen[ been reduced into writing?
i..) Have iny reluted L`ascs been se[tJed aj a result?
(]lease lis[ i`ase numbers:
+. [f no, what \vcis the primary reason for non-settlement:
Case was NOT mediated because:
Ll) I Case was deemed unrit for mediation. Why untl[?
b) I One or more necessary partles neve"ppeared:
I Plaintiff I Defendant I Both
H One or.more necessary parties failed to dppear for a follow-up
I .Plaintiff I Defer,dant .I B.oth
il) I One or? more p:irties could not obtain`authority lo negotiate
I Plaintiff I Defendant I Bo,h
Ciise L\[ediated but:
c) I One or more parties appei`red but refused to participate in mediation
I Plaintiff I Defendant H Bo,h
® r) I C()illd not reach ,`grcemen[on terms
J. Dates:
;I.) Rctum o[. file to court:...e?.a
1)) P{`r[ies ;`ppearance before tile court:
Nt)ilal Of.tlc`er's Name: .,.A/.. Gi
s,gn.`[ur.`Gbe ``...,.'
Date. cfq \.`.LILOZL
t
