Kerala High Court
Janaki vs Thankappan on 2 August, 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C. JAYACHANDRAN
FRIDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF AUGUST 2024 / 11TH SRAVANA, 1946
AS NO. 295 OF 1999
AGAINST THE DECREE AND JUDGMENT DATED 31.07.1998 IN OS NO.34 OF 1994 OF
SUB COURT, PALAKKAD
APPELLANTS/PLAINTIFFS:
1 JANAKI
W/O.BALAN, PAKANGI VEEDU, THOLANUR, P.O.PALGHAT.
2 THAYU
W/O.KUTTAN, MANGOTTUPURA, PULLODE, THENUR P.O., PALGHAT
3 KUTTIMALU,
W/O.RAMAKRISHNAN, PALAKKA VEEDU, POTTASSERY AMSOM,
POONCHOLA, P.O., PALGHAT.
4 RAJAN,
S/O.APPUKUTTAN, RESIDING AT VEERANGATHU VEEDU,
POTHUNDI.P.O., NEMMARA, PALGHAT.
5 KRISHNANKUTTY,
S/O.APPUKUTTAN, RESIDING AT VEERANGATHU VEEDU,
POTHUNDI.P.O., NEMMARA, PALGHAT.
6 SUBHADRA,
D/O.APPUKUTTAN, RESIDING AT VEERANGATHU VEEDU,
POTHUNDI.P.O., NEMMARA, PALGHAT.
7 CHANDRAN
S/O.APPUKUTTAN, RESIDING AT VEERANGATHU VEEDU,
POTHUNDI.P.O., NEMMARA, PALGHAT.
8 SHANTHA KUMARI,
D/O.APPUKUTTAN, RESIDING AT VEERANGATHU VEEDU,
POTHUNDI.P.O., NEMMARA, PALGHAT.
BY ADV SRI.T.M.SUNIL
SMT.S.CHITHRA,
SMT.M.PREETHA
RESPONDENTS/DEFENDANTS:
1 THANKAPPAN
S/O.MUTHU, RESIDING AT THANICHAMPURA VEEDU, KARIYANKODE
P.O., VARODE AMSOM, PALGHAT.
*2 CHELLAN (DIED)
S/O.MUTHU, RESIDING AT THANICHAMPURA VEEDU, KARIYANKODE
P.O., VARODE AMSOM, PALGHAT.
3 CHANDRAN
S/O.MUTHU, RESIDING AT THANICHAMPURA VEEDU, KARIYANKODE
A.S. No.295 of 1999
2
P.O., VARODE AMSOM, PALGHAT.
4 PARU
W/O.CHELLAMANI, KALATHIL VEEDU, KARIYANKODE, P.O.KOTTAYI
AMSOM, PALGHAT
5 N.K.SIVARAMAN
S/O.APPUKUTTAN, RESIDING AT VEERANGATHU VEEDU,
POTHUNDI.P.O., NEMMARA, PALGHAT.
6 A.UNNIKRISHNAN,
S/O.APPUKUTTAN, RESIDING AT VEERANGATHU VEEDU,
POTHUNDI.P.O., NEMMARA, PALGHAT.
7 CHELLAMANI,
S/O.RAMAN, KALATHIL VEEDU, KARIYANKODE P.O., KOTTAYI
AMSOM, PALGHAT.
8 MANI,
S/O.KUTTAN, THANICHAMPURA VEEDU, KARIYANKODE P.O., KOTTAYI
AMSOM, PALGHAT.
*9 AMMACHU (DIED)
W/O.AYYAPPAN, RESIDING AT THANICHAMPURA VEEDU, KARIYANKODE
P.O., KOTTAYI AMSOM, PALGHAT.
10 THANKAMMA,
W/O.CHELLAN,THANICHAMPURA VEEDU, KARIYANKODE P.O., KOTTAYI
AMSOM, PALGHAT.
11 RADHAKRISHNAN,
S/O.CHAMUNNI, KANNIYODE PARAMBU, KARIYANKODE P.O.,
PALGHAT.
12 PAZHANAN,
S/O.CHAMIYAR, OTTUPURA PARAMBU, KARIYANKODE P.O., PALGHAT.
13 CHAMIKUTTAN,
S/O.KUNCHELAN, PALASSERI VEEDU, PARALI .P.O EDATHARA
AMSOM, PALGHAT.
14 PUSHPALATHA MENON.
VAVULLIYAL MUKKU, KOTTAYI.P.O, PALGHAT.
15 M.CHAMI,
S/O.V.A.MUTHU MOOTHAN, KARNAKI FINANCIERS, PUNARTHAM
ENTERPRISES, MELUMURI, PALGHAT.
16 BHAGYALAKSHMI,
W/O.HARIDAS, KOTTAMANGALAM, KOTTAYI.P.O., PALGHAT.
* IT IS RECORDED THAT RESPONDENT NOS.1,3,4 AND 10 ARE THE
LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES OF THE DECEASED RESPONDENT NO.9 AND
RESPONDENT NO.10 IS THE LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE
DECEASED RESPONDENT NO.2, VIDE ORDER DATED 21.05.2024 IN
MEMO DATED 12.08.2009.
A.S. No.295 of 1999
3
BY ADVS.
SRI.P.R.VENKATESH - R1
SRI.A.R.GANGADAS - R3, R5, R6
SMT.ANJU GOVIND - R3, R5, R6
SRI.D.KRISHNA PRASAD - R10
SRI.SANTHEEP ANKARATH - R14
SRI.K.P.BALAGOPAL - R16
THIS APPEAL SUIT HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02.08.2024, THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
A.S. No.295 of 1999
4
C. JAYACHANDRAN, J.
------------------------------------
A.S. No.295 of 1999
------------------------------------
Dated this the 02nd day of August, 2024
JUDGMENT
This Court notice that this appeal is of the year 1999.
The service on the respondents have not been completed
at any point of time. In addition to that, the death of the
parties are also not properly dealt with, in accordance
with law by impleading the legal heirs on time. This being
an appeal, which is more than twenty five years old, the
same was posted and considered on 29.07.2024. On that
date, the counsel for the first respondent submitted that
the first respondent is no more. On the request of the
counsel for the appellant, it was posted to 30.07.2024.
On 30.07.2024, it was submitted on behalf of the
respondent no.10 that the appellant no.2, respondent
nos. 1, 2, 4, 7, 9, 11 and 13 are no more. A memo to that
effect was also filed. Learned counsel for the appellant
submitted on 30.07.2024 that he has no instructions from
the appellant. Anyway, the matter was adjourned to this
date for final consideration.
2. Today, there is no representation for the appellant,
presumably for the reason that the counsel is not in
receipt of instructions from the appellant. It is also
noticed that the persons who are reported to be no more
expired much earlier, that is to say, some of them have
expired even before ten years. The apparent lack of
interest on the part of the appellant is writ large.
In the circumstance, this appeal will stand dismissed
for non prosecution.
Sd/-
C. JAYACHANDRAN
JUDGE
SKP/02-08
