Kerala High Court
Sindu vs Mohanachandran Nair on 20 February, 2025
Author: K.Babu
Bench: K. Babu
2025:KER:14943
O.P (C) No.889 of 2014
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K. BABU
THURSDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2025 / 1ST PHALGUNA,
1946
OP(C) NO. 889 OF 2014
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 03.06.2013 IN I.A NO.4627/2012 IN
OS NO.547 OF 2007 OF PRINCIPAL MUNSIFF COURT, NEYYATTINKARA
PETITIONERS:
1 SINDU,
W/O.LATE SREEKANTAN NAIR,
VALIYATHERUVU PUTHEN VEEDU, KADAVATTARAM DESOM,
NEYYATTINKARA- 695 101
2 DEVIKA,
D/O.LATE SREEKANTAN NAIR,
VALIYATHERUVU PUTHEN VEEDU,
KADAVATTARAM DESOM,
NEYYATTINKARA -695 101
REPRESENTED BY HER MOTHER 1ST PETITIONER
3 GOPAKUMARAN NAIR, *(DIED)
S/O.ACHUTHAN NAIR,
VALIYATHERUVU PUTHEN VEEDU,
KADAVATTARAM DESOM,
NEYYATTINKARA- 695 101
4 KAVITHA A.S, AGED 36 YEARS,
W/O.LATE GOPAKUMARAN NAIR,
VALIYATHERUVU PUTHEN VEEDU,
KADAVATTARAM DESOM, NEYYATTINKARA,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
2025:KER:14943
O.P (C) No.889 of 2014
2
5 AJAY.G, AGED 16, S/O.LATE GOPAKUMARAN NAIR,
VALIYATHERUVU PUTHEN VEEDU,
KADAVATTARAM DESOM, NEYYATTINKARA,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
6 ABHIRAM.G, AGED 9,
S/O.LATE GOPAKUMARAN NAIR, VALIYATHERUVU PUTHEN
VEEDU, KADAVATTARAM DESOM, NEYYATTINKARA,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
*ADDL. PETITIONERS 4 TO 6 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER
ORDER DATED 2.8.2017 IN I.A. NO.1338/2017.
PETITIONERS 5 AND 6 ARE MINORS REPRESENTED BY
THEIR MOTHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN, THE 4TH
PETITIONER ABOVE.
BY ADVS.
SRI.K.B.PRADEEP
SRI.ASHOK SURESH
RESPONDENTS:
1 MOHANACHANDRAN NAIR,
S/O.ACHUTHAN NAIR,VALIYATHERUVU PUTHEN VEEDU,
KADAVATTARAM DESOM,NEYYATTINKARA 695101
2 MURALEEDHARAN NAIR,
S/O.ACHUTHAN NAIR,S/O.ACHUTHAN NAIR,
VALIYATHERUVU PUTHEN VEEDU, KADAVATTARAM DESOM,
NEYYATTINKARA -695101
3 GEETHAKUMARI *(DIED)
D/O.RAJAMMA, VALIYATHERUVU PUTHEN VEEDU,
KADAVATTARAM DESOM,NEYYATTINKARA
4 BINDUKUMARI,
D/O.RAJAMMA, VALIYATHERUVU PUTHEN VEEDU,
KADAVATTARAM DESOM, NEYYATTINKARA-695 101.
2025:KER:14943
O.P (C) No.889 of 2014
3
5 RAJAMMA PILLAI SREEKUMARI, SREEVALSAM,
NMCXXIX/222, VLANGAMURI, KADAVATTARAM DESOM,
NEYYATTINKARA-695 101.
*(RESPONDENTS 1,2 AND 4 ARE RECORDED AS THE LEGAL
HEIRS OF DECEASED 3RD RESPONDENT VIDE ORDER DATED
09.10.2024 IN MEMO DATED 04.10.2024.)
BY ADVS.
SRI.V.G.ARUN NEYYATTINKARA
SRI.S.ARAVIND
SRI.RENJITH B.MARAR
SMT.RESHMI JACOB
SRI.V.R.REKESH
SRI.P.S.RAGHUKUMAR
SRI.K.SASIKUMAR
THIS OP (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
20.02.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:14943
O.P (C) No.889 of 2014
4
K.BABU, J.
--------------------------------------
O.P (C) No.889 of 2014
---------------------------------------
Dated this the 20th day of February, 2025
JUDGMENT
The parties in a suit for partition are before this Court. The
Trial Court initially passed a preliminary decree partitioning the
property. The preliminary decree was challenged by defendant No.1
alleging fraud by way of an application under Section 151 CPC. The
Trial Court allowed the application and recalled the decree as per
Ext.P8 order. This order is under challenge in this Original Petition.
2. Needless to say, the suit is pending before the Trial Court.
3. Three items of the property are included in the suit. Even
prior to the institution of the original suit, some of the sharers had
alienated their right over item No.3 property to a stranger, who is
respondent No.5 in the present petition.
4. It is submitted that the parties other than assignee of the
sharers (respondent No.5) arrived at a settlement. The
2025:KER:14943
compromise arrived at by the parties and reduced to writing has
been produced before the Court for perusal. Respondent No.5
contends that the inclusion of the third item of the property that had
been assigned to him in the agreement entered among the parties
without his junction would cause prejudice to him.
5. It is submitted that Clauses 33 and 34, wherein there is a
reference regarding the partition of the property assigned to the
stranger, will be deleted and a fresh compromise will be produced
before the Trial Court.
6. It is made clear in the compromise that the parties are at
liberty to institute a fresh suit for partition in respect of the third
item.
7. Having regard to the fact that the sharers have arrived at a
compromise in respect of the properties other than item No.3, upon
which the stranger makes a claim, the matter is liable to be
remitted to the Trial Court. Therefore, the matter is remitted to the
Trial Court with liberty to proceed with the suit. The parties are
2025:KER:14943
also at liberty to file a compromise, the legality of which will be
considered by the Trial Court.
The Original Petition stands disposed of.
Sd/-
K.BABU,
JUDGE
KAS
2025:KER:14943
APPENDIX OF OP(C) 889/2014
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF APPLICATION IN IA NO
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF APPLICATION IN IA
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF APPLICATION IN IA
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTIONS FILED BY
THE 2ND PLAINTIFF AGAINST EXT.P1
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTIONS FILED BY
THE 2ND PLAINTIFF AGAINST EXT.P2
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTIONS FILED BY
THE 2ND PLAINTIFF AGAINST EXT.P3
EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DISMISSING
EXT.P1 & P-3 APPLICATION DATED 03-06-
EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ALLOWING EXT.P2
APPLICATION DATED 03-06-2013
